People-United Uncensored

Series #2 TAXATION FRAUD -- Part 2 Our Harmful Presumptions Keep Men and Women Enslaved

People-United Uncensored — Sun, 30 Aug 2026 12:01:03 GMT

You are a part of the fastest growing Canadian truth Substack. And thanks to your support and readership, we can continue to expose what is keeping every one of us enslaved to the globalist communism apparatus of the New Democratic/Liberal/Conservative/Green Party traitors without realizing it. All are sworn to allegiance to the World Government -- for example, NDP used to be called Socialist Party of Canada.

OUR presumptions are weaponized against us. We PRESUME the words and terms that lawyers use to draft legislation, especially taxation-related legislation, mean what we think they mean. Our presumptions are wrong.

If the government can print unlimited amounts of money out of thin air, why do they collect taxes? The reason is that you pay high taxes only to uphold the illusion that you are funding the government and its ability to provide infrastructure and services. But the high taxes are part of the profits generated by the Government of Canada, a for-profit corporation listed on Dun & Bradstreet:

The for-profit corporate government is funded by printing money – paper backed by more paper. It is a bubble that inevitability must burst once everyone realizes this is all a massive fraud. Thus, the move to force us to use digital only, which is the creation of money with less than air.

Not one of these taxes existed 60 years ago:

The Inheritance tax.
Accounts Receivable Tax,
Airline Surcharge tax,
Airline Fuel Tax,
Airport Maintenance Tax,
Building Permit Tax,
Capital Gains Tax,
Carbon Tax,
Cigarette Tax,
Corporate Income Tax.
Death Tax, Dog License Tax,
Driving Permit Tax,
Environmental Tax (Fee),
Excise Taxes, Federal Income Tax, (Federal) Unemployment Insurance (UI),
Fishing License Tax,
Food License Tax, Gasoline Tax (too much per liter);
Food tax,
Global Tax,
Gross Receipts Tax, Health Tax,
Halal Certification hidden tax,
Hunting License Tax
Hydro Tax, Interest Tax,
Liquor Tax, Luxury Taxes, Marriage License Tax,
Medicare Tax, Mortgage Tax,
Personal Income Tax,
Probate Tax,
Property Tax, Poverty Tax, Prescription Drug Tax,
Provincial Income and sales tax,
Real Estate Tax,
Recreational Vehicle Tax,
Retail Sales Tax
School taxes;
Service Charge Tax, School Tax,
Vehicle Sales Tax,
Telephone: Federal Tax, Provincial and Local Surcharge Taxes, & Minimum Usage Surcharge Tax,
Vehicle License Registration Tax,
Rain Water Tax,
Municipal Vacancy Tax
Watercraft Registration Tax,
Well Permit Tax and
Workers Compensation Tax

The fact is that simple words such as Monarchy, person, resident, residence, and individual have a totally different meaning then what the man or woman think it means when used in legislation.

Lawyers even have a special ‘law’ dictionary, while we are taught to use the English or French language dictionaries. This is the deception and trickery that keeps us enslaved to greedy corporations such as our for-profit governments. The lawyers speak a language that is different than our English language but sounds similar.

Being a Constitutional Monarchy is nothing to brag about as you learn here! Monarchy means dictatorship by a Queen or King and ‘constitution’ refers to the corporate document that outlines the dictator’s commercial enterprise.

Let’s see how OUR presumptions keep us hoodwinked and taxed to death:

To interpret any legislation, you need to refer to the rules on interpretation and the case law.

Interpretation Act, R.S.C., 1985, c. I-21
General definitions
35 (1) In every enactment,
Canada, for greater certainty, includes the internal waters of Canada and the territorial sea of Canada; (Canada)
Canadian waters includes the territorial sea of Canada and the internal waters of Canada; (eaux canadiennes)
internal waters,
(a) in relation to Canada, means the internal waters of Canada as determined under the Oceans Act and includes the airspace above and the bed and subsoil below those waters, and
‘person’, or any word or expression descriptive of a person, includes a corporation;

Now, for the settled law on the meanings and usages of the terms “Includes” and “including”--

The power-and-revenue-generating administrators of the landmass really want Canadians to misunderstand the limited scope of their Statutes and therefore have long exploited the fact that ‘includes’ is usually used by the non-lawyer in casual speech as meaning ‘supplemental’, as in ‘also includes’.

This is the same tactic that lawyers use, known as DOG-Latin or legalese, to trick the public with the term ‘person’, which until recently, very clearly was defined in the law dictionaries as ‘corporation, association’.

Once the public started to catch on to the definition of ‘person’ as being legal entities like corporations and associations, fictitious legislation such as the Income Tax Act (ITA) quickly changed the definitions and terms.

As of August 2025, as you will see later the ITA refers to entity and violates statutory framing principles by merging two classes of objects, legal entities and human beings. The ITA also sprinkles definitions of taxpayer, natural person, individual and other important terms throughout the legislation so that they can’t be easily located.

The common usage of ‘also includes’ usually misleads most of us presented with statutes (legislation), in which the term ‘includes’ appears.

Why are we being deliberately misled?

Contrary to common usage by non-lawyers, ‘includes’ in law is the near-equivalent of ‘means’, providing for the creation of a very narrow, specialized class to which the term being defined in the legislation exclusively applies.

Take for example –

‘person’ includes corporations, associations, societies, foundations

In law ‘includes’ is synonymous with ‘means’. Therefore:

‘person’ means corporations, associations, societies, foundations

In that example, what follows ‘includes’ defines the narrowly specialized class that is ‘legal or artificial person’. That specialized class of objects that embraces the named objects (corporations, associations, societies, foundation), and other members of the broader general class of such objects, which are not explicitly listed but share the special characterises that distinguish the enumerated examples from that general class, BUT no others.

Therefore, the special class following ‘includes’ in the definition of ‘person’ embraces corporations, societies, foundations, associations, and even groups and club organizations.

BUT THE DEFINITION DOES NOT INCLUDE HUMAN BEINGS BECAUSE THEY DO NOT SHARE THE CHARACTERISTICS OF THE REST OF THE EXAMPLES THE DEFINITION PROVIDES TO IDENTIFY THE SPECIALIZED CLASS CONTEMPLATED BY THE DEFINITION.

Get in the habit of mentally replacing the word ‘include’ with ‘means’ and you will then avoid being duped. We deal with these terms and how they are used in the ITA to dupe us later.

*** Extremely important:

In the definitions of Canada and Canadian Waters above, you see the clever use of the term ‘includes’, which automatically means to most people that Canada and Canadian Waters refer to the land and the inland and coastal waters, but that is not the case.

Land does not share the same characterises as water and is not in that specialized class that involves water, therefore the definitions of Canada and Canadian Waters, does not include the landmass itself.

The definition of Canada has nothing to do with land and those dwelling on the land.

Case law regarding ‘includes’ being the equivalent of ‘means’

Here’s how the United States Supreme Court explains the ‘includes’ rule:

“[T]he verb “includes” imports a general class, some of whose particular instances are those specified in the definition.” Helvering v Morgan’s, Inc, 293 U.S. 121, 126 fn. 1 (1934);
“[I]ncluding... ...connotes simply an illustrative application of the general principle.” Federal Land Bank of St. Paul v. Bismarck Lumber Co., 314 U.S. 95, 62 S.Ct. 1 U.S. (1941).
“The ordinary significance of the terms, as defined by the dictionaries, both Webster and the Standard, is “to confine within; to hold; to contain; to shut up; embrace; and involve Include or the participial form thereof, is defined to ‘comprise within’; ‘to hold’; ‘to contain’; ‘to shut up’; and synonyms are ‘contain’; ‘enclose’; ‘comprehend’; ’embrace’,”
Montillo Salt Co. v. Utah, 221 U.S 452, at 455, 466.
“The term ‘includes’ and ‘including’ do not exclude things not enumerated which are in the same general class.” –27 CFR 72.11. (Emphasis added).

Here is some Canadian case law on the meaning of ‘includes’:

Statutory Interpretation - “Includes”

In The Ontario Health Coalition v. Ontario (Minister of Long-Term Care) (Ont Divisional Ct, 2025) the Divisional Court dismissed a June 14, 2023 decision of the Minister of Long-Term Care (the “Minister”) and ordered it to approve funding and to issue a licence for a new 320 bed long-term care home in Pickering, Ontario.

Here the court considers the specific statutory term, “includes”:
[67] The OHC contends that there is no bar to the exercise of the court’s discretion to permit an unincorporated citizen group from being granted standing under Judicial Review Procedure Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. J.1 (JRPA). It notes that s. 1 of the JRPA defines “party” as including “a municipality, association of employers, a trade union or council of trade unions which may be a party to any of the proceedings mentioned in subsection 2 (1)”.

[68] In my view, the definition of “party” in s. 1 of the JRPA does not assist the OHC. “[T]he word “includes” does not necessarily require an expansive interpretation extending the definition beyond the itemized list…The word “includes” may, depending on the context, precede a list that exhausts the definition”: Cochrane v. Ontario (Attorney General), 2008 ONCA 718, 92 O.R. (3d) 321, at para. 52. See also: R. v. Loblaw Groceteria Co. (Manitoba), 1960 CanLII 84 (SCC), [1961] S.C.R. 138, per Fauteux J., (concurring); Canada 3000 Inc., Re; Inter-Canadian (1991) Inc. (Trustee of), 2006 SCC 24, [2006] 1 S.C.R. 865, at paras. 47-50.

[69] As explained by Ruth Sullivan in The Construction of Statutes, 7th Ed. (LexisNexis Canada, 2022), at s. 4.04[3]:
While definitions that begin with “includes” are non-exhaustive in the sense that they do not displace the ordinary meaning of the defined term and often enlarge it, they are exhaustive in the sense that, for the definition to apply, the person or thing in question must come either within the ordinary meaning of the defined term or within the meaning of the terms following “includes”.

In Toronto (City) v. Craft Kingsmen Rail Corp. (Div Court, 2023) the Divisional Court considers the statutory interpretation of “includes”, here used in a definition of real property:

F. Inclusive Definition

[92] The Application Judge accepted, at para. 27, that the definition of “land” in s. 1 of the Assessment Act was an inclusive definition but concluded that what was included was limited by the examples listed in subsections (a) to (e) to something affixed to the ground. He stated, at para. 41:
Everything about the definitions in s. 1, as broadened by the SCC, speaks to the relationship of something else with the ground. The broadened part of the definition is the inclusion of chattels that are on the land with some permanence but are not fixtures.
[93] This part of his analysis was, however, based on his premise that real property at common law did not include the air above the land, and, therefore, he concluded, the examples listed in s. 1 could not be used to include something that had no connection to the ground. If we reject the premise, however, the examples listed in (a) to (e) cannot be used to narrow what was already included in the common law.

[94] The word “includes” is generally used to indicate that what follows are examples rather than an exhaustive list: Sullivan, at §4.04. This is confirmed by reading s. 1 of the Assessment Act as a whole. Section 1 of the Act lists 23 definitions. Nineteen of those definitions use the word “means”, which “generally precedes a definition to be construed as exhaustive”: Canada 3000 Inc., Re; Inter-Canadian (1991) Inc. (Trustee of), 2006 SCC 24, [2006] 1 S.C.R. 865, at para. 46. Only four of the definitions in the Act use the word “includes.” In this context “includes” cannot be interpreted as limiting the definition to the itemized list.

[95] The Supreme Court of Canada and the Court of Appeal have both confirmed that the examples given in the definition were intended to expand on the common law definition. These cases do not support the proposition that there was any intention to subtract from or limit the common law definition of land or real property. See also Owners, Strata Plan para. 39.

One never reads any piece of legislation in isolation because they are all intertwined to form a mosaic that requires a lawyer to unpackage and analyze to get at what applies in any situation.

To give lawyers the monopoly, lawyers write legislation in a way that important provisions of the law are spread all over many enactments and not just in one enactment. Even within one enactment, the important definitions are all over the document in the most illogical of places and expressed in deceptive ways so that you cannot do a simple keyword search to find the definitions.

Another perfect example is the federal Payment in Lieu of Taxes Act(PLTA) that we will thoroughly discuss later.

If you read the definition of ‘federal property’ and miss the reference to ‘subject to s. 3’, you automatically presume that it means CROWN land. That’s what all common people presume -- ‘federal property’ means it belongs to the Queen and they look no further in the Act.

The fact is that federal property also means our regular homes, farms, swimming pools, golf courses… but that part of the definition is hidden much further along in the Act where no one would think to go.

Why is that important? Because under this Act, the municipality is supposed to apply to the federal government for payment out of the Consolidated Revenue Fund, in lieu of collecting property taxes from men and women (not referring to corporations here).

We hope these examples, some of which we discuss in greater detail later, help you understand that YOU MUST STOP PRESUMING!!!

Let’s first dispel two of your most harmful presumptions that most Canadians have about ‘taxation’ that keep you brainwashed:

#1 if we don’t pay taxes, the government cannot provide the necessary services

Totally untrue. The true wealth of Canada comes from its sale of lumber, minerals, water and other resources, excise taxes, corporate taxes and other sources, amounting to hundreds of billions of dollars annually. This wealth is supposed to be kept in the account called the Consolidated Revenue Fund and administered in the best interests of the beneficiaries of this land.

The Trustee (government) is supposed to manage the ‘Trust’ to benefit the beneficiaries (the inhabitants) not corporations, foreign governments and religions and greedy politicians.

Instead, the corporations, disguised as trustee governments, steal it by the billions and send it overseas, most recently to fund Islamic State and Chinese-style communism administered by the World Economic Forum and United Nations coalitions.

IF YOU THINK THAT THE COUNTRY WOULD FALL APART WITHOUT INCOME TAX YOU ARE VERY MUCH MISTAKEN. Our taxes are building and/or keeping up many foreign governments, as well as the United Nations, NATO, the World Economic Forum (WEF).

For decades the government has fed you the line that “The country needs income tax in order to provide necessary services”. And of course, to go along with their lies and deception they have their deceptive ‘Budget’ which is 100% fictitious and has nothing to do with the actual monies in the collective bank account of Canadians that ends up used by politicians for personal use.

Most governments need some commercial and industrial contribution of taxes, but they do not need nor are they entitled to force men and women (humans) to contribute to commerce and the tax base.

That’s why Justin Trudeau was able to say in a public forum, for all to hear, that the budget balances itself. Listen to him here.

The government would keep on running just fine without any income tax from men and women, if they were not using it to grease political pockets, support endless wars, promote social justice agendas, and divisive foreign ideologies. Income tax is the smallest revenue stream available to the government; the major ones are prosperity and enterprise generators.

If anyone tells you that you are a ‘free loader’ if you refuse to pay income taxes, they are part of the cabal enslaving you and are wilfully ignorant of the facts and the law that applies to human beings and their wealth.

#2 taxes are like death, no one has a choice

The individual has a difficult time standing alone against the corrupt government corporations and the ignorant ‘leaders’ of various activist groups that aid them in the charade, but it has been done.

The wealthy do not pay taxes because they know their rights and are part of the corporate cabal.

Since 1985 the foreign state corporation UN is the dictatorship enslaving Canadians and replacing all domestic law. As you will learn, it is in the process of adding yet another income tax – payable to the United Nations directly, to be collected by the Canada Revenue Agency!

If everyone knew their rights, and especially if they realized they are not a corporate commodity/asset unless they unwittingly agree to be, they could act collectively and put an end to the illegal taxation of men and women by corporate governments.

One of the reasons this is true is that as you learn from Series #3 CONSTITUTION-CHARTER FRAUD, the British Royals cut every province loose in 1931 to be a sovereign republic (sovereign nation-State -- with its own constitution -- which would end all income tax on men and women (for starters).

Canadian Indians Had no Need to Fight to be Income Tax Exempt

The entire time that Canadian Indians were fighting to remain exempt from income taxation, they were in fact already entirely exempt for two reasons:

(a) taxation of the income derived from an individual’s expenditure of energy, time and personal labor is defined as slavery and that was to be abolished through various international treaties, and

(b) there never was an Income Tax Act in Canada because there was never a nation called Canada; there was only ever a for-profit corporation called CANADA and it was to operate only on inland and territorial (coastal) waters as you read in the definition of Canada above.

See the story of the fight of Indians to remain tax exempt and to run their own government, here. This in turn ensured the individual Indian was always caught between a rock and a hard place.

Not only was there not an Income Tax Act, let alone one that ever applied to men and women of any race in Canada, but there was never a valid Indian Act because there was never a valid Constitution or Charter, ever. See the proof of this in Series #3 CONSTITUTION-CHARTER FRAUD.

Thus, Canadian Indians were busy fighting illusions.

Note how the lawyer author of the piece linked above uses the UN’s new name for Indians (Indigenous) and promotes that the Charter of Rights and Freedoms as a valid document, when in fact it was never assented to and could never apply to men and women in any event, even if assented to as a corporate document attached to another corporate document (Constitution 1867), that also was not effective.

Lawyers are always deliberately hiding the facts by discussing the pretend laws they helped to impose and keep alive.

IF the author, a lawyer with a major international law firm, had used the proper terminology (Canadian Indian) and noted that the Charter and Indian Act were illusions -- and useless -- as at least 2 recent Prime Ministers have stated publicly, and if he had pointed out that there never was an Income Tax Act, you would have understood the entire Aboriginal fight against Income Taxation was a sham.

Humans are either a sovereign or a slave; like being pregnant, you either are or are not. Once captured as a slave, the corporate master extorts you for what YOU worked for, to be used for itself and its friends in high places. It can also force you to be injected, to suffocate yourself with a mask over a non-existent virus, and to give up your land and your children.

IF ANYONE TRIES TO TELL YOU THAT YOU ARE A RADICAL FOR CLAIMING YOUR SOVEREIGNTY AS A HUMAN BEING, KNOW THAT THOSE NAME CALLERS ARE A HUGE PART OF THE PROBLEM FACING CANADIANS.

The Mafia pales in comparison to the criminal cabal called corporate Canadian Governments who constantly refer to ‘our democracy’, knowing full well that a democracy is mob rule and they control the ‘mob’.

INCOME TAXATION OF NATURAL PERSONS (MEN AND WOMEN) IS EXTORTION AND ILLEGAL

How did we get here?

If Costco, Walmart or any other corporation came into your home and told you that whatever you earned today, you must hand over, you would realize you are being robbed and call the Police (well, maybe not because a 22 is more persuasive).

If Bell, Rogers, Amazon or any other corporation walked into your life and said that you were now part of their corporation, and that they had made corporate regulations that obligated you to do as you were ordered, you would likely tell them off pretty quickly, claiming that they don’t own you.

However, when a corporation masquerading as ‘government’ does the same thing, you think it’s perfectly natural and you do as you are told. You are owned and don’t realize how they managed to do that. Check Series #2 NAME THEFT to learn exactly how it was done to you at birth.

It’s the word ‘Canada’ that throws you off the path of truth; the Canada referenced by the government is not the landmass. They are referring to their for-profit corporate entity (juridical entity) called CANADA, Inc, listed on the Securities Exchange Commission and even Dun & Bradstreet. That’s why they named the corporation ruling over us the same as the landmass – to keep us duped that the corporation is the landmass.

When they name their legal entities on their securities (eg. birth certificates), they make sure it sounds and looks much like our true given names so we won’t notice the sleight of hand.

Securities Exchange listing for Ontario is here and the Securities Exchange listing for Canada is here.

When the corporate government refers to one of their schemes being ‘in the best interests of Canada’, or ‘a good investment for Canada’, you now know that it is referring to this scheme being in the best interest of their corporation.

Canada’s Income Tax legislation is a corporate scam run by an International Banking cartel (corporations all work for the World Government and Bank of International Settlements. Their collectors and enforcers are an agency called Canada Revenue Agency (CRA). Canada Revenue Agency has always been, just as the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) in the US, a private FOR-PROFIT company run by an International Banking Cartel.

The list below was compiled by keywording searching some more well-known agencies, services and departments of the government in Dun and Bradstreet, a database of all the corporations in the world as well as the Security Exchange Commission (SEC) database. You see the CRA, the Court of Justice, a police service and so. If you have the time, you can check the databases for free and find all ministries, governor-generals and so on.

In a special section of this series, we explain why there has been no income tax legislation since the War tax expired in 1917.

‘Is Canada Revenue Agency a Criminal Organization? (archived here) is an eye-opening exposé about Federal Court Justice Noel and Freemasonry in Canada’. The article explains how the CRA is the enforcement arm of a criminal cabal that operates exactly as does the Mafia.

Since there is no Income Tax Act that allows impositions on Canadian men and women, the CRA is acting unlawfully and therefore criminally. You will learn shortly how they use extreme deception in the Income Tax Act to deceive individual men and women.

We will show you the contradictions in their definitions designed to totally confuse you, and how they contradict Black’s Law Dictionary definitions.

In addition, you will see how the law dictionaries adjust their ‘definitions’ of legal terms to suit the corporate cartel keeping us enslaved while we presume they are using plain English wording and terms.

Why the fictitious Income Tax Act, 1985, Could NOT Apply to Men and Women

Now we will explain why the Income Tax Act, 1985, even if not just a piece of fiction, could apply only to legal persons (given names of individuals turned into legal entities owned by a corporation) and not to living men and women (human beings), unless they unwittingly think the fictitious Act applies to them.

NOTE that the Income Tax Act, 1985 was put in place by the United Nations in the same year the corporation masquerading as the Canadian government was transferred to the control of the foreign corporation United Nations using the United Nations Act, 1985.

Men and women were tricked into applying for a Social Insurance Number (SIN), which is essentially proof that the corporation owns you. However, they didn’t tell you that the SIN program, as with the Income Tax of individuals program and the Birth Certificate application are totally voluntary. It’s on their forms and literature, but in such small font that you need a strong magnifying glass.

See here for the statement of voluntary SIN program.

The Income Tax Act was also voluntary for individual men and women because it was both unlawful and never in force after 1917. That fact was in the Tax Operational Manual (section 91.1), but as soon as the location was revealed to the public in 2013, the manual was amended to obscure that fact -- much as the corporate government does with the Criminal Code of Canada to keep their brother criminals out of prison.

Tens of millions of individual Canadian men and women (natural persons) have been targeted by this corporate income tax (mafia) cartel enforcer, had their properties seized for alleged taxes owed, yet as shown by the Rudoph story linked here (archived here), the CRA was entirely unwilling and unable to account for where the money went after the disposal of the property they stole from this Canadian. Usually the properties targeted were very valuable small businesses, large swaths of land or residential properties.

Rudoph’s is only one of millions of stories of Canadians being targeted, exploited and extorted this way, losing their homes and property.

The facts and the law that should apply to all human beings in Canada, as you will see in upcoming articles, are that income taxation by a corporation (juridical fictitious legal entity) of a man or woman is 100% extortion and unlawful, but the criminal cabal appears unstoppable, given that the Courts and politicians are fully controlled by the Freemason cult that controls these cartels.

Be sure to also check out our UN INVASION of CANADA – ‘Peace Bait’ series (starting here), our MUNICIPAL FRAUD newsletters (starting here), our PUBLIC-PRIVATE PARTNERSHIP RACKETS series (starting here) and our PROPERTY THEFT series (starting here).

We kindly ask that when sharing this research, you appropriately credit People-United, and point people towards our Substack newsletters. Decades have gone into collecting this information and there is much more to come.

Thank you for your attention and any help that you can send our way, from sharing widely to sharing more evidence that you may have with us, or tips or subscriptions. While we could use financial support, it is more important to us that this information gets out to as many people as possible, as fast as possible.

Also, please let us know if any of our hyperlinks have stopped working so that we can fix them. Thank you.

People-United
people-united.ca

Subscribe now

Tip via Kofi/Stripe

E-transfer tips within Canada:
ADMIN-PU@proton.me

Series #2 TAXATION FRAUD -- Part 1 Proof All Taxation of Live Men and Women is Unlawful and Illegal

People-United Uncensored — Thu, 27 Aug 2026 12:01:37 GMT

This subject matter involves a great deal of discussion regarding the multitude of illegal taxes corporate governments and their various agencies are imposing on us.

Even Halal Certification is a hidden tax, and 3^rd party agreements between municipalities and ‘collection’ companies such as Fire Marque can result in double-taxation. This Series #2 TAXATION FRAUD is therefore divided into 11 Parts (some with subparts).

Part 1 introduces readers to our current situation and who is behind it. In subsequent parts we will review the various most egregious taxation schemes impacting all our lives and that are responsible for the homelessness and poverty we see today across the landmass.

All income tax on what men and women earn with their own labor, energy and time is common slavery.

All property taxation of primary residences and family farmland is extortion and theft.

Only income tax on corporations and businesses is lawful, and only sales tax on NON-essentials can be lawful.

“Canada is in the grips of ‘modern socialism/old communism’. Socialists in the past thought they had to seize assets, nationalize everything.
Modern socialists/communists realize they don’t need to seize things; they just need to regulate and tax them in a way that their existence depends on the whims of unelected bureaucrats and corrupt politicians.
The socialist/communist left is focused on stagnating the economy, starting with a modern version of socialism. ALL REGULATION is a hidden form of taxation and wealth transfer from productive men and women to parasitic corporations, bureaucrats and politicians.”
~ People-United, 2023

Canadians are suffocating under almost 1 million regulations and requirements!

WE live on a Tax Farm as Free Range Humans
~ Source unknown

(Source: Preferred Network) – The economists advising the government have it all figured out!

The Taxation Industry is a criminal corporate cartel masquerading as ‘government’, complete with an extortion regime that literally stalks you from cradle to grave, and beyond.

By using deceptive language, coercion and deadly force, fictitious laws and subterfuge, men and women were drafted into servitude to corporations masquerading as ‘government’ at all levels. This makes Canada a corporatocracy, not a democracy.

Corporate Canada Will Tax ANYTHING Now… This Rabbit Hole Is INSANE

CANADA, Inc. is running out of things to tax. In the linked video, the host exposes the most ridiculous taxes already imposed on us, and the proposed taxes in Canada, including:

• Toronto’s infamous “Rain Tax”, now imposed by most municipalities

• The never‑ending Bedroom Tax idea

• The Luxury Tax disaster

• Anti‑flipping rules

• Airbnb crackdown

• Bare‑trust chaos

• GST on top of other taxes

• And the new AMT trap

This Series on TAXATION FRAUD will show you why ALL taxation, except sales tax on non-essentials is unlawful and extortion. Taxation in Canada is used as a punishment, when extortion and intimidation doesn’t work.

Let’s start with a 1996 internationally-binding covenant agreed to by the corporation masquerading as the Canadian government, even though all servitude and forms of slavery had been abolished in the 1800s:

This conniving wealth transfer scheme called taxation on men and women, is a gross violation of the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (ICESCR), (archived here) upheld by the Supreme Court of Canada as binding on the Canadian government:

Part 1
2. All peoples may, for their own ends, freely dispose of their natural wealth and resources without prejudice to any obligations arising out of international economic co-operation, based upon the principle of mutual benefit, and international law. In no case may a people be deprived of its own means of subsistence.
Divito v. Canada (Public Safety and Emergency Preparedness), 2013 SCC 47, [2013] 3 S.C.R. 157:

[22] – Canada’s international obligations and relevant principles of international law are also instructive in defining the right: Slaight Communications Inc. V. Davidson, [1989]
1 S.C.R. 1038; United States v. Burns, 2001 SCC 7, [2,00] 1 S.C.R. 283; Canadian
Foundation for Children, Youth and the Law v. Canada (Attorney General), 2004 SCC 4, [2004] 1 S.C.R. 76; R. v. Hape, 2007 SCC 26, [2007] 2 S.C.R. 292. In Reference re Public Service Employee Relations Act (Alta.), [1987] 1 S.C.R. 313, Dickson C.J., dissenting, described the template for considering the international legal context as follows: The content of Canada’s international human rights is, in my view an important indicia of the meaning of “the full benefit of the Charter ‘s protection” I believe that the Charter should generally be presumed to provide protection at least as great as that afforded by similar provisions in international human rights documents which Canada has ratified. [p. 349]

Without your knowledge or fully informed consent, men and women (human beings) have been drafted (forced) into servitude to corporations that have disguised themselves as ‘government’ -- federal, provincial and municipal governments. Now that many if not all government services have been privatized, we are also in servitude and extorted by private corporations masquerading as government.

This taxation slavery was achieved by using deceptive language that robbed you of your given name, imposed a legal (non-human) status on you and then went on to trick you for most of your life.

By May 2024, the imposter Canadian government is entertaining tax based on skin color). This is called Critical Tax Theory.

IT IS ESSENTIAL that you review our NAME THEFT series and our upcoming CRIMINAL LANGUAGE series and to understand this deceptive language and how YOUR presumptions are what keep you enslaved. After reading this Series, check out how all this is applied to deprive you of your property and possessions in Series #2 PROPERTY THEFT starting here, as well as the Series #2 CODE ‘96’ DECEPTION starting here.

Monarchy means ‘dictatorship’ and that could be a dictatorship headed by a single person and their mega corporation, such as the fictitious Queen/King. Before you claim that we are a Constitutional Monarchy and a democracy, you need to be clear on what these terms mean and why it all means you are 100% a slave. Take 10 minutes to awaken to the reality of the situation in Canada, here.

‘Democracy’ was invented by the Greeks, however, part of the system was the death penalty for all fraud, such as election fraud and treason. Without that penalty, democracy is a free-for-all situation for political and corporate thieves. Canada is proof that no democracy can work when there is no consequence for treason, extortion, racketeering and fraud.

A dictatorship (monarchy) with a meaningful enforceable constitution does not exist.

Men and women have been brainwashed into believing that unless they pay taxes, there can be no roads, services or military. And as we will show you, those who are brainwashed into perpetual servitude to a corporate dictatorship have been lied to in writing to their faces!

The Canadian landmass is so rich in valuable resources, not a single inhabitant ever needs to pay taxes if the revenues from resource sales were not stolen by elite and or sent to fund mosques, wars, fake charities, the UN and the WEF.

A 2014 National Post (archived here) report highlighted how quickly Canadian people were being robbed by taxation, spending more on taxes than on the necessities of life:

“Canadians pay 42% of income in tax — more than they spend on food, shelter, clothing combined.

Since 1961, the average family’s tax bill has risenby 1,832%, dwarfing increases in the costs of housing, clothing and food, according to a Fraser Institute report...”

By 2017, Fraser Institute reported:

“Many Canadians may think housing is their biggest household expense, but in fact, the average Canadian family spent more on taxes last year than on life’s basic necessities — including housing, Canadians’ tax bill has risen by over 2,000 per cent since 1961, much faster than the price of many consumer products.”
~ Charles Lammam, director of fiscal studies at the Fraser Institute, 2017.

By 2024, the Fraser Institute reported that the Canadian standard of living is on a 40-year decline and indicating it will go much lower, especially as the Carbon Tax continues to be increased, while immigration of undesirables and the unproductive by the millions continues unabated. Canadians’ tax bill has risen by over 2,000% since 1961, much faster than the price of many consumer products.

Not only is Canada a corporate welfare state, but it is a massive migrant welfare system destroying the middle and even lower upper income classes. Many high earners have reported being one paycheque away from insolvency.

Yes, we did hear how the Carbon Tax on individual purchases were to stop, but they are still very much imposed on transportation, energy and so many other essential services that impact everyone directly in the pocket book. In July 2026, the Canadian government claimed it would assist ‘families’ with the cost of living by providing up to $1800 – but that was a massive trick. It simply changed the name of the GST/HST refund.

Not included in that list of taxes above are pseudo-taxes: extortive licencing and levies of all kinds, built-in extortion halal certification costs passed on to the consumer, permits and 3^rd party ‘agency’ arrangements, as well as other creative government means of transferring your wealth to itself, after which it is used to aid the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) and Islamic State invasions of Canada. (See the CHINESE INVASION and ISLAMIC INVASION series for the upsetting details.)

Then there is tax on tax and interest penalties on tax, and interest on interest penalties on tax, even though Canada signed at least 3 international agreements to end all forms of slavery which specifically includes the taxation of the income of men and women by all means, including hidden fees and levies.

According to the true law we will show you, humans are not to be imposed on for income tax or property taxes on primary residences and family farms. If you must give what YOU worked for to another, or if you are forced to work for free (such as by collecting and remitting HST for the CRA without compensation) that is called servitude. When the government (corporate imposters) taking your money can leave you homeless if you resist being robbed, it is called slavery and extortion.

Governments have only the lawful and legal authority to tax corporations. As you will see, they do not have the legal or lawful right to tax men and women (human beings) but have forced a fraudulent Income Tax Act on Canadians.

Once the corporate municipal governments were given the authority over the decades to ride roughshod over men, women, their families and their private property by ‘incorporating’ the ordinary working man and woman into their corporations, they used their internal by-laws, municipal planners and army of enforcers to keep them enslaved.

According to a Toronto Star report, (archived here) for every dollar corporations pay to the Canadian government in income tax, men and women pay $3.50. Yet this is OUR land and corporations are supposed to be paying us for the privilege of doing business on it. The proportion of the fictitious public budget funded by personal income taxes has never been greater.

From the report:

Sixty-five years ago, people and corporations contributed equal amounts of income tax to the Canadian government.
Since then, the scales have tipped in the corporations’ favour. Corporate taxes have been slashed and people have been forced to make up the difference.
In 2015/16 — the most recent statistics available for the report— Canadians paid $145 billion in income tax, while corporations paid $41 billion.

None of that extortion of men and woman has ever been lawful or legal and we will demonstrate why in this series.

Did you know that the top 20% of Canadian income-earning families pay more than half (archived here) of all taxes in Canada?

Did you know that many (socialist-communist) NDP politicians, such as Kwan in BC, defended Chinese Immigrant Entrepreneur (business) tax evaders when she stated:

“The Chinese are very private about their money.”

When some legislators discussed a law to make Chinese business millionaire immigrants pay their share of business income taxes, Kwan objected:

“This law (against Chinese tax evasion) goes against our culture.”

Yes, indeed, tax evasion by immigrant business owners is legal because their culture allows it! In contrast our culture allows us to be swindled by the Monarch’s bullies. Remember that the term ‘Monarch’ is a synonym for ‘dictator’.

Did you know that the Canada Revenue Agency (CRA) released the results of a secret study confirming that millionaire migrants made 90% of luxury home purchases in two Metro Vancouver municipalities while declaring refugee-level incomes? It took the CRA 5 years to respond to the Freedom to Information (FOI) request for those statistics!

But it’s illegal for Canadian men and women to evade totally unlawful taxes. Hmmm?

Economists Point to Opportunities to Steal

CANADA is a corporation masquerading as ‘government’. Once that is truly understood, only then can Canadians unite and oust these mafioso corporate gangs.

The government keeps telling us how important it is to attract and keep corporations in Canada…it’s important to the corporate parasites, yes, but they are absolutely worthless to men and women who have to support them.

CANADA, the corporation, has interest only in making profit while keeping us enslaved and dumbed down, entertained by the endless political theatre featuring trained career politicians.

In this video the host covers Canada’s over-taxation debacle faced today -- The Over Taxation with ZERO Representation Scam Won’t Save Canada’s COLLAPSED Economy! (archived here). Canada, facts show, has been thoroughly destroyed by the over-taxation scam run by the UN World Government (an international corporation) and enforced by local government (domestic corporation).

Learn in under 3 minutes from an Ottawa trucker’s video how the tax-on-tax-on-tax scheme works in Canada-- he proves these facts using invoices he is provided by retailers.

Another example of tax-on-tax:
Did you know that in 2023, the Trudeau Liberals are charging HST on the Carbon Tax? (archived here). You read that right. They are charging tax on tax.
Justin Trudeau’s finance minister, traitor and diehard communist, Chrystia Freeland, can’t tell us how much her tax on tax will cost Canadians. It seems she can’t calculate how much HST will be charged on the Carbon Tax!
Here’s the answer:
- an extra 61 cents-a-litre at the pump
- an extra $573 a year—on top of the first carbon tax of $1,500 per family

Well, Trudeau is gone, but the taxation and open extortion continue. It was the case before him and will always be the case after him because Canadians believe they must put up with a corporatocracy!

Canadians can’t afford to pay more. Canadians cannot afford a for-profit corporation masquerading as government and using the color of law to steal from us.

Before you get all excited about Pierre Poilievre, know that he was in Cabinet when all the legislation that set Justin Trudeau up nicely to destroy Canada was passed, and he was a WEF member. See more about him in Series #3 TREASON. This image below shows how tough things are for him:

The government’s profits are found where economists say they are found. This is why, based on the ‘opinions’ of 2 economists and a horribly fraudulent computer model of the COVID situation and response, our country’s economy was destroyed.

Economists were behind the gun by-back scam and now are angling to steal secondary residences and short-term rentals that same way.

The Canadian Federal Government planned in November 2023, to ‘buy back’ (seize) private property and secondary homes, which the government sees are being used as short-term rentals. The purpose is to house the homeless and migrants the government has invited to flood the country. And it is planning to allow millions more into the country in coming years! You will own what they allow you to own.

Further, the government intends to use the federal system of taxation to coerce property owners into using their properties as the government wishes them to, including to house illegal aliens and migrants. Taxes will be raised to ‘buy-back’ private property, even though the properties were not purchased from the government.

The system will operate exactly like the gun-buy back scheme because it is set up by the same corrupt economists.

Economists have been pushing and supporting Carbon Tax, as their modelling is designed to help corporations make trillions in profit. Economists are against the People of Canada.

If the government was to abandon the carbon tax entirely, inflation in Canada would drop 16%, stated Bank of Canada Governor Tiff Macklem, to House of Commons Finance Committee, October 30^th, 2023.

And yet, the Canadian government refuses to cancel what they call a ‘pollution tax’, which is in fact a wealth transfer mechanism.

(Source unknown) Bank of Canada Governor Tiff Macklin, Reported by “The Epoch Times”: Carbon Tax Responsible for 16% of Inflation: Bank of Canada Governor

On the same day the Bank of Canada issued a ‘fire alarm’ emergency on Canada’s declining productivity, a large contingent of economists issued an Open Letter in support of Canada’s now very unpopular carbon tax and rebate policy (archived here). Carbon taxes jumped 23% on April 1, 2024, from $65/tonne to $80/tonne.

The Canadian Federation of Independent Business (CFIB) estimates that small businesses pay nearly half of the federal carbon tax revenue but receive only 0.17% of all carbon rebates between 2019 and 2023. Enterprises in Ontario, Alberta, Saskatchewan, and Manitoba are owed $2.5 billion.

Did you know that the federal government is refusing to pay the $2.5 billion in unpaid carbon tax rebates (archived here) that it owes to small businesses? Where do you suppose that money went?

We have the Carbon Tax for the same reason we had COVID lockdowns – so the corporate government and their political supporters can make money, lots of money for themselves at the expense of Canadians.

The corporate government is extorting hundreds of billions of dollars from Canadians trapped by a global economy that relies heavily on the transportation industry. Most other countries have no such extortion.

It’s clear economics and computer modellers run the country. The electorate has nothing to say.

Of course, there are big profits in this carbon tax extortion and well-paid globalist economists WANT that profit. So, they support killing the economy further using a carbon tax to transfer the wealth of ordinary Canadians upward.

(Source: Western Standard, March 30,2024) Carbon Tax World Map: Canada almost totally alone in imposing Carbon Taxation!

Canada is not even on the carbon pollution map, but it’s about the only country that thinks it can save the planet by taxing its population while the largest carbon emitter, China, has no such taxation plans!

Canada’s Socialist DEI Tax System

MUST WATCH (archived here). From this 2.5 minute video, you will learn that according to the corporate Government of Canada’s own data, the wealth of white Canadians (former PM traitor Stephen Harper called us ‘old stock’) is being transferred to other races by the United Nations that has controlled this country since 1985.

Trudeau’s 2016 speech at the WEF even referred to ‘refugees’ as the ‘future’ of Canada! Except that NONE have been refugees and none have any allegiance whatever to Canada or interest in assimilating.

Part of reaching the UN’s migration goal by 2030 is to eliminate all whites and to replace us with other races who are satisfied to live on the socialist government teat. The government teat gets the money from those who built this country, saved and sacrificed.

Everything from OAS, GIS, CPP and low-paying jobs, pensions of all kinds, taxes on land, theft of private property by municipalities and so on, provide the source of the wealth transferred to those who did not earn it.

Carousel Schemes

Who‘s robbing millions from The Bank of Canada? (archived here). Elaborate frauds known as carousel schemes are using fake business transactions to reap fraudulent tax refunds from the Canada Revenue Agency, costing Canadian taxpayers hundreds of millions of dollars.

Of course, there are international entities involved, as explained by the linked The Fifth Estate episode, which seems not to mention the politicians and ‘elected’ officials behind the fraud. This is understandable since, Justin Trudeau and the Liberal/NDP coalition pays the CBC almost $2 billion annually in subsidies, grants and bribes.

Since all these fraudsters and the enablers in government work for the United Nations (UN) world government apparatus, they are immune from prosecution and charges of treason, so don’t expect anything to come of these explosive ‘investigations’.

But you can imagine the UN is not happy about losing tax dollars. No worries though, it will make it up by taxing the common man and woman more to make up the shortfall!

Rent-Seeking Drains the Economy: don’t confuse this with renting property

Rent-seeking is when an individual or an entity seeks to increase their own wealth without benefiting society by taking a ‘cut’ of what others earned with their labour, energy and time.

Ever wonder how some people pay high income taxes, but some billionaires manage to escape paying income taxes at all?

The concept of ‘rent-seeking’, which is essentially getting a financial/economic reward without producing anything in return, is one of the main tricks. Rent seeking takes forms such charitable donations, bribery, corruption, smuggling, and black-market enterprise. The real estate brokerage industry, the taxation agencies, institutional rental companies and so many others are rent-seeking.

Learn about ‘rent-seeking’ in this excellent article ‘What Is Rent Seeking in Economics, and What Are Some Examples?’ (archived here) by Christina Majaski, December 03, 2021.

Rent seeking (or rent-seeking) is an economic concept that occurs when an entity seeks to gain added wealth without any reciprocal contribution of productivity. Typically, it revolves around government-funded social services and social service programs.

“Rent” in rent seeking is based on the economic definition of the term, which is defined as economic wealth obtained through shrewd or potentially manipulative use of resources. A more colloquial way of describing this behavior is “privilege seeking.”
An example of rent seeking is when a company lobbies the government for grants, subsidies, or tariff protection.
Rent seeking comes in many forms from lobbying or donating funds.
For example, if you donate money but write it off on your taxes, it could be considered a form of rent seeking.

Plain and simple, it is a scam and explains why there are so many ‘charitable’ corporations operated by billionaires and their corporations that pay no taxes because they ‘donate’ to one another.

Also, please let us know if any of our hyperlinks have stopped working so that we can fix them. Thank you.

People-United
people-united.ca

Subscribe now

Tip via Kofi/Stripe

E-transfer tips within Canada:
ADMIN-PU@proton.me

Series #2 CODE '96' Deception Part 2 – How You are Deprived of Your Share of the Wealth of the Landmass

People-United Uncensored — Sun, 23 Aug 2026 12:01:25 GMT

In this Part 2, we will explain the scheme that allows criminal politicians to raid the CRF depriving the People of their share of the wealth of this land.

The Minister of Revenue is the Receiver General of Canada. The Receiver General receives all monies, makes all payouts, and everything is deposited into the Consolidated Revenue Fund (CRF).

The money in the CRF that belongs to all Canadians is paid out in only 2 ways:

By ‘requisition’ from Ministers and other specific authorities using a specific Requisition Form under Section 33 of the Financial Administration Act, 1990 (FAA).
By Claim of Appropriation: by providing receipts, instructions for Payment–this claim is also referred to throughout the FAA as Claim for Settlement.

Financial Administration Act, RSC 1990

Definition of instruction for payment
35 (1) In this section and section 36, instruction for payment means an instrument or other instruction for the payment of money, but does not include a requisition under section 33.
Form of payments out of C.R.F.
35 (2) Every payment out of the Consolidated Revenue Fund shall be made under the direction and control of the Receiver General by the issuance of an instruction for payment, in such form and authenticated in such manner as the Treasury Board may direct.
Claim for settlement
35(3) An amount set out in an instruction for payment issued under subsection (2), less any amount charged back as a result of a reconciliation pursuant to section 36, may be paid out of the Consolidated Revenue Fund where
(a) a claim for settlement of the amount is made by a member of the Canadian Payments Association or by a person authorized by the Receiver General to make a claim for settlement; and
(b) the claim is made in the prescribed manner and is accompanied by the prescribed evidence.
Prescription of manner of claim
35 (4) The Receiver General may prescribe the manner of making a claim for settlement and the evidence that must accompany the claim.
Reconciliation of claim with evidence and instruction for payment
36 (1) Where a payment out of the Consolidated Revenue Fund is made in respect of a claim for settlement, the Receiver General shall examine the claim and make a reconciliation between the claim and
(a) the supporting evidence; and
(b) the instruction for payment to which the claim relates.
Here is the provision regarding Requisitions and the way Ministers take money from the CRF:
Requisitions
33 (1) No charge shall be made against an appropriation except on the requisition of the appropriate Minister of the department for which the appropriation was made or of a person authorized in writing by that Minister.
Form
33 (2) Every requisition for a payment out of the Consolidated Revenue Fund shall be in such form, accompanied by such documents and certified in such manner as the Treasury Board may prescribe by regulation.

If Ministers are to use the Requisition Form and nothing else, then who uses the Claims of Settlement procedure, if not individuals guaranteed an adequate standard of living?

It turns out that the Banks -- acting as the party between the utilities (as an example) and the CRF -- arranges for the Settlement and then keeps OUR money for itself.

Canada Payments Association (Payments Canada)

They tell us that ‘members’ of the Canadian Payments Association (CPA), which is a private for-profit corporation, get money from the CRF by a process called a Claim of Settlement. The corporation is also known as Payments Canada.

The CPA is sent remittance slips --numbering in the billions daily -- by ‘member’ banks and other financial institutions. Often, just the remittance slip number is provided instead of the actual paper slip, as most everything is done electronically these days.

For clarity, the remittance slip is that section of a bill that you would detach from the bill/invoice attach to your cheque if you were paying by cheque. Remember that the line you place your signature/autograph on the cheque is a microprint that says the signature represents the ‘agent’ of the ALL CAPS legal entity noted at the top of the cheque.

When you take the bill to the bank, the teller detaches the remittance slip and keeps it along with your cheque, which as you will learn shortly, you need not have provided if the remittance slip was coded ‘96’.

According to guidelines we will discuss later, the CPA confirms the accuracy of the individual remittance slips delivered to it by banks and other financial institutions, every day. The CPA then submits a Claim to the Receiver General for the total amount of all the remittances delivered to it that day. All this is done by computer daily.

The Receiver General cuts the CPA a cheque for the total amount accounted for by the CPA. The money is then routed back to the financial institutions that submitted the remittance slips, less the CPA commission/fee for processing. (Otherwise, the financial institutions would be sending millions of remittance slips every day directly to the Receiver General, who would then have to cut millions of individual cheques to the financial institution).

This is perhaps an oversimplification, but think of the process as somewhat the way the postal service works: all the mailbox contents go to the central Canada Post depot daily, get sorted and then sent out for delivery. In this case, the boxes are the financial institutions, the mail is the remittance slip (often just the coding from the slip) and the money accessed from the CRF is sent out to the financial institution that submitted the remittance slip. They know which bank and payee by the coding at the bottom of the remittance slip

Meanwhile, the bank or financial institution takes the money that you gave it as payment for the utility and transfers it to the utility. So, the remittance slip and your money got separated. Sometimes only the coding on the remittance slip is entered at the financial institution instead of the entire paper slip and they stamp your remittance slip paid and let you keep it for your records. In other cases, they take both the remittance slip and your money, stamp your invoice paid and return it to you.

IF the Claim of Settlement process is not also the method by which individuals are to access their adequate standard of living, then how?

It’s clear that what stands between the Bank who took your payment and the remittance slip that came with your utilities bill and your money in the CRF, is the CPA. But what about the groceries you paid cash for, the gas you purchased, or the bus fare you paid?

Those expenditures didn’t go through the bank to provide a remittance slip if you paid cash and without the remittance slip no money comes out of the CRA--which is another reason they want to do away with cash.

How the government is depriving Canadians of their rightful patrimony/security?

As we learned above, Ministers use Requisitions, while all others, such as corporate financial institutions, use Claims of Settlement…that is clear from the legislation BUT, the corporate government has refused to respond to Freedom of Information Requests for all records that show exactly the procedure individuals are to follow to make the Claim of Settlement for purchases of the necessities of life to have an adequate standard of living.

Perhaps you are supposed to keep trying until you luck into just the right procedure, contrary to the corporate government’s mandate to teach us this.

The government has a mandate to provide the regulations for making Claims against the CRF for our adequate standard of living, but if these regulations exist, they are buried very deeply in a lot of legalese: the People are deprived of this knowledge and in fact, the government refuses to provide guidance on how to make a correct Claim of Settlement when asked. See here.

The fact is that a Claim for Settlement was CORRECTLY SUBMITTED by an individual, complete with the receipts, the evidence, an authorization and the required instruction as to which bank account to deposit the claim amount into.

According to the FAA evidence (records) are to be provided for a Claim for Settlement, which is what was provided with the individual’s claim. The authority to make the claim is inherent in the fact that the government is the ‘trustee’ and the government signed on to the declarations that ensure all men and women (and their families) are provided an adequate standard of living (not basic income, but an adequate standard on an individual basis). The instruction for payment is where the individual tells the government who to make the payment out to and directly to a bank account or by cheque to an address.

Claim for settlement
35 (3) An amount set out in an instruction for payment issued under subsection (2), less any amount charged back as a result of a reconciliation pursuant to section 36, may be paid out of the Consolidated Revenue Fund where
(a) a claim for settlement of the amount is made by a member of the Canadian Payments Association or by a person authorized by the Receiver General to make a claim for settlement; and
(b) the claim is made in the prescribed manner and is accompanied by the prescribed evidence.
Prescription of manner of claim
(4) The Receiver General may prescribe the manner of making a claim for settlement and the evidence that must accompany the claim.
Reconciliation of claim with evidence and instruction for payment
36 (1) Where a payment out of the Consolidated Revenue Fund is made in respect of a claim for settlement, the Receiver General shall examine the claim and make a reconciliation between the claim and
(a) the supporting evidence; and
(b) the instruction for payment to which the claim relates.
Destruction of instructions for payment, records, etc.
(2) The Treasury Board may, on the recommendation of the Receiver General and with the approval of the Auditor General of Canada, make regulations governing
(a) the destruction of records of instructions for payment, including payment instruments, after the amounts specified in the instructions for payment have been paid;
(b) the destruction of claims for settlement; and
(c) the destruction of records of instructions for settlement, including instruments for settlement within or between departments, after settlement has been effected.

If you check here (Regulations, FAA), there are presently 554 regulations relating to payments out of the CRF … a number refer to First Nations tribes, and some to reimbursement of travel expenses.

As the private individual learned, the Minister will not refuse to ‘authorize’ the claim and the payment; they simply will not provide the process or guide to do so that they provide to the Canada Payments or other institutions and individuals making claims of settlement from the CRF. The government sent back some of the records the individual had provided (it kept the rest) and attached a note stating this was not the correct way to make a claim for settlement. When asked for the correct way, there was no answer. So there is a correct way, but they are keeping that a secret except among friends.

Meanwhile the government’s legally-binding international obligation to provide an adequate standard of living for every living man and woman goes unsatisfied. When that was pointed out the GOVERNMENT refused, this time justifying their refusal by alleging that THERE IS NO AUTHORITY OF PARLIAMENT to settle the individual’s claim!

Response re: Claim of Appropriation Jan 15 2018 – no Parliamentary authorization:

This is the government’s response to one individual’s effort to access the CRF -- the Trustee Government of Canada is simply gaslighting and refusing to provide an answer. The author of the letter claims there is no Parliamentary authorization to pay out individual claims for settlement! And NO MANDATE, yet Parliament had an obligation (through the International Covenants – see Part 1) to pay Her (now His) Majesty’s debts, obligations and guarantees!

And every Canadian is an obligation for the Queen … she has guaranteed to provide for them from the wealth and resources of the landmass.

Why not then provide for all individuals by reimbursing for the costs of living, since the government has a clear mandate to provide an adequate standard of living from our collective wealth and that standard of living is evidenced by the amount the individual spent to live?

Moreover, the truth is that:

The FAA is the authority of Parliament
The International Covenants were guaranteed by Her Majesty and bind Parliament.

Parliament is bound by the Queen’s guarantees in the ICESCR and ICCPR and any other debts and guarantees she has given.

The corporations masquerading as government lie, obfuscate and double-speak to defeat individual claims for settlement of an adequate standard of living. THESE LIES ARE CONTINUED IN THE LOWER COURTS, EVEN THOUGH THE SUPREME COURT HELD THAT THE COVENANTS ARE BINDING ON ALL LEVELS OF GOVERNMENT! See an example at paragraph 25 of the Decision in Divito v. Canada (Public Safety and Emergency Preparedness), [2013] 3 SCR 157, 2013 SCC 47 (CanLII) (archived here).

In addition:

There is no law that states the individual cannot make a claim for settlement. The law says that authorization is required for anyone other than a Canada Payments corporation member, but no process is provided to access that authorization. The law does not say individuals are not entitled to authorization or to make the claim; they just hide the process to get that authorization. The Minister is mandated to ensure every individual has an adequate standard of living and the Minister is part of the Trustee with the power to do so -- yet that part of the mandate that ensures we know how to get the authorization is hidden.
The response to a correctly submitted claim and evidence was not rejected because it was incorrectly prepared…the excuse was that there was no ‘authority’ of Parliament! They can say that because as you learn from the CONSTITUTION-CHARTER FRAUD series, there is no confederation, no constitution, no federal government, no parliament!
See the transcript of Elizabeth II’s first televised speech (Christmas, December 25^th, 1957), wherein she stated

“I cannot lead you into battle, I do not give you laws or administer justice”. You can listen to the whole speech here.

NO legislation in Canada is ‘assented to’, not by the fictitious Royals or their lapdog Governor Generals in Canada since 1931 and that is why she stated this!
The other reason is because she knew she had faked her coronation on February 6^th, 1953…see about the fake Coronation Stone, how she swore allegiance to the Pope (illegal and treasonous) and other facts about this fraud here, here and especially from our upcoming Series #3 CONSTITUTION-CHARTER FRAUD.
Clearly the corporate government has no intention of honouring its binding human rights agreements. Note in the letter the reference to the individual having no right authorized by Parliament, when the rights were in fact authorized by Her Majesty in 1976 through the binding International Covenants guarantees and Parliament was to ensure these guarantees were satisfied.
The corporate Trustee calling itself our government is preventing the exercise of human rights in Canada and claiming that there are no authorities in Canada to support the claim, yet Parliament passed the FAA!
This is gross corruption by a corporate de facto authority. If an individual could by-pass the Bank and submit their remittance directly, the Bank would not get what should have been reimbursed to us.

As you can see, the government dishonours its legal obligations to ensure that we can access revenue that belongs to the People to experience an adequate standard of living by:

Not clearly stating how an individual is to make their Claim for Settlement, even though the FAA refers to the Minister ‘prescribing the method’’
Not stating the proper way to provide an instruction for payment OR the evidence required for a successful claim;
Not stating how the receipts for an adequate standard of living are to be provided, when and to whom.
By allowing the Banks to get between us and the Canada Payments corporation, wherein the bank pockets what we paid and sends the CRF proceeds to the utilities.
The author states “The information on the bill payment remittance permits your financial institution to send your payment to the company’s financial institution electronically, and the payment that you have made is then deposited into the account of the company that you are paying.” The author conveniently does not mention that at the same time, the bank submits the remittance slip to CPA and collects the same amount which is keeps for itself. Why is the bank keeping the entire amount (less the CPA commission)?

The Freedom of Information requests resulted in our obtaining all records about what banks need to do to access money from the CRF, but the government has insisted that there is no access to the fund by an individual.

Then who is accessing the CRF using the Claim of Settlement method other than financial institutions, if it’s not a Minister (they use ‘requisitions’) or an individual, and why will they not disclose who the entities are that get to make Claims of Settlement? Why are they immediately destroying documents once payment is made?

The Code ‘96’ on all utility bill remittance slips identify Consumer Purchases for essentials of daily living

The number ‘96’ found at the bottom right corner of utility bill remittance slips (as examples) is important in distinguishing between an individual’s purchases for those items that are required to experience an adequate standard of living, and those that are not, or that are business expenses.

*** The ‘96’ code does not show up on business remittance slips, such as the utility bill for a restaurant. Now that they bury the coding in QR Codes, you can’t see the coding at all unless you get a paper bill and pay by cheque or at the bank.

The process generally goes like this:

YOU take YOUR money and YOUR remittance slip showing what your water, or electricity or gas, telephone, car insurance, internet cost YOU for the month to your financial institution. These are all expenses that YOU need to live adequately (essentials). Check the bill/invoice and you will find a reference on the remittance slip to ‘96’.

The financial institution takes your money, stamps the remittance slip paid. Sometimes they stamp the remittance slip paid and give it back to you, other times, they keep the remittance slip. Because things are done electronically, the Transit information that identifies the utility company is keyed into their database if they give you back the remittance slip for your records.

The financial institution transfers your money to the utility company because the remittance slip provides the routing information at the bottom of the slip. But the bank also takes the electronic data from YOUR paper remittance slip and submits it to the CPA in a huge batch each day. The situation is the same if you pay on-line – because everything is paperless, all the coding is used by the computers to ‘batch’ remittances and the remittance slip coding.

The CPA then checks to make sure all the remittance information is coded properly. The remittances with the Code 96 that represent CONSUMER PURCHASES are batched together, the amounts are totalled and a Claim for that day is made to the Receiver General for a settlement from the CRF (Consolidated Revenue Fund).

Since the Trustee government should be paying your living expenses out of our collective Trust, the reimbursement from the CRF should come directly to you, but it doesn’t. It goes to the financial institution that kept and submitted YOUR remittance slip information. The financial institution KEEPS IT!

Thus, YOUR expenses involved in having the guaranteed standard of living are never paid for out of the CRF. Not only did you pay out-of-pocket for the essential service, but the financial institution made a clear profit by simply keeping money that should have been reimbursed to you.

The financial institution should not have accepted payment for the bill coded ‘96’ because it was getting that money from the CRF and after taking it’s handling fee, should have sent the payment to the utility/payee.

This is much the same as taking a cheque that is made out in someone else’s name, cashing it and keeping the cash for yourself! The remittance slip is not in the name of the bank! And it has the ‘96’ code indicating it is a Consumer Purchase (human purchase), not a corporate bank purchase. But the Bank submits it in this scheme as though it was the Bank’s and keeps the money that should have been reimbursed to you, the individual who already paid the utility.

How does the bank and government turn a human being into an incorporated legal entity that it can do whatever it wants to and with? By stealing the human name and distorting it into a fictitious legal entity. See our Series #2 NAME THEFT details, starting with Part 1 here.

How does the bank and government steal a human being’s money that should be reimbursed because that human paid for the utility that it already owns? By pushing it through a remittance system that the bank hijacks to convert the Consumer Purchase into a reimbursement it will keep for itself.

On February 7^th, 2019, an unnamed individual at Payments Canada stated the following in response to a question as to why ‘96’ was showing up on all private utility bills and what it means (the original is seen here):

“Hello, and thanks for connecting with Payments Canada.
Code 96 is an internet myth that incorrectly interprets Payments Canada Rule H6.
A bill payment remittance, which appears at the bottom of an invoice, is a way for you to send a payment to that biller. It is not a payment to you.
The bottom portion of an invoice, or bill, referred to in the CPA Rules as a bill payment remittance, cannot be “redeemed” or “accepted for value” by the person who is required to pay an amount owing. Signing a bill payment remittance or writing any personal information on it is not a valid way to pay or somehow ‘cancel’ the amount that you owe the biller. Not paying for goods or services can have serious legal consequences, which fall outside of Payments Canada’s jurisdiction.

To pay a company to which you owe money at your financial institution, you give the financial institution the bill payment remittance along with a payment from your own funds. The information on the bill payment remittance permits your financial institution to send your payment to the company’s financial institution electronically, and the payment that you have made is then deposited into the account of the company that you are paying.

Kind Regards,
Payments Canada”

As you can see, everything is an ‘internet myth’ when the government needs to hide something.

Let’s break down the contradictions between what the CPA letter states and the actual contents of the CPA Guide, Rule H6. A copy of the relevant provisions of Rule H6 of the Payments Canada Guide that we discuss below is here so that you can keep it open as you consider the following:

The writer of that letter completely contradicts the CPA guide that refers to financial institutions sending REMITTANCE SLIPS TO THE CPA. The Guide states that the remittance slips must be prepared, coded and batched in specific ways when sent to the CPA for processing.
The writer is falsely stating that the Bank takes the money you paid and the remittance slip and sends both to the utility provider. Obviously, that is not so if the Guide refers to the remittance slips sent to it by the Bank.
The writer’s first sentence should give anyone pause. The writer states that Code 96 is an internet myth and that it is this Code 96 myth that incorrectly interprets the entire 6-7 pages of CPA Guide Rule H6! Yet, as you can see from the copy of Rule H6 you just opened up, Code 96 is not an internet myth because its identified specifically in their own Guide, and the term is only referenced once (2 lines) and is listed as a ‘Transaction Code’, not the entire Rule H6.

‘Transaction’ refers to whether it’s a consumer purchase, or a reversal of a payment or NSF cheque, etc. Specially, Code 96 refers to On-Us kind of transaction…not a reversal of payment, not an NSF cheque, but a consumer purchase. Other codes refer to other specie of transactions.
The writer first starts out talking about ‘Code 96’, discounts it as a myth, but in their last paragraph of the letter imply that the coding (presumably the ‘96’) is necessary in order that your financial institution knows what utility to send your payment to. That is not the fact, and obviously the writer cannot have it both ways in the same letter…if it’s a myth, then it cannot be real and necessary.

As you can see from the 2^nd page (page 47 of the Guide), section 2.2 (b) references an On-Us Field-Code 96 that is totally separate from section 2.2 (c), which is identified as the Transit number. The Transit Number Field contains the Corporate Creditor Identification Number (CCIN).

The Code ‘96’ number is not part of the CCIN corporate identifier whatsoever! For the writer to suggest that the Code identifying the kind of transaction (Code 96) is needed to identify the creditor is therefore a deliberate misrepresentation.

In other words, the utility company is identified by the Transit number on the remittance slip, not by the Code ‘96’ number which the Guide says is merely an indicator that the transaction is one that is On-Us (reading this logically, they are referring to a Consumer Purchase).

The Code 96 number is separated by a great many spaces from the Transit number on all utility and other consumer purchase remittance slips that we’ve looked at. The On-Us Code 96 details are even separated significantly from the Transit CCIN number in the Guide.
The writer implies that the Code ‘96’ is necessary to identify the creditor (Corporate Creditor), yet how can every separate utility be identified by the same Code ‘96’?
The writer implies that the coding is mandatory, whereas the Guide at section 2.3 says its not. On the 3^rd page (page 48 of the Guide), under (a) Content, it refers to the OCR line, which is the Corporate Creditor information. If the creditor’s information is not mandatory, then a properly and fully completed receipt from a grocery store cash register should also do as ‘evidence’ of a consumer purchase.
The writer implies that the On-Us ‘Code 96’ field is essential to identify the Corporate Creditor (utility company), but as you can see from the sample of a proper OCR Coding on a paper remittance shown on page 4 (page 49 of the Guide), there is no ‘96’ that forms part of the OCR Coding.

No wonder the writer of that email response didn’t provide their name or title!

The entire 2020 RULE H6 - RULES PERTAINING TO THE INTER-FINANCIAL INSTITUTION EXCHANGE OF BILL PAYMENT REMITTANCES FOR THE PURPOSE OF CLEARING AND SETTLEMENT that we captured and linked above was changed in 2021 and the 2021 version that has not changed re the Code 96 is found here at page 43 (archived here).

The entire 2021 RULE H6 – RULES PERTAINING TO THE INTER-FINANCIAL INSTITUTION EXCHANGE OF BILL PAYMENT REMITTANCES FOR THE PUPOSE OF CLEARING AND SETTLEMENT, is provided here.

Page 43 of Canada Payments Guide, H6 Rule re Code 96 On-Us coding:

As you can see, the H6 Rules of Payments Canada section on On-Us Coding does not mention same-institution transfer or make any suggestion that On-Us are not handled remittances.

But in 2022, that changed. In the Glossary of the H6 Payments Canada Guide, it defines On-Us as not a remittance they handle or have data for!

And the Coding 96 has vanished from private (not commercial) utility bills! All reference in the 2022 Payments Canada H6 Rule for remittances is directed at businesses.

In May 2023, the QR Code replaced the digital coding. But, as mentioned earlier, those people who get their paper bills and pay by cheque still see the full line of coding and ‘96’ on the remittance slips.

The Canada Payments website is found here.

The legislation that created the corporation, Payments Canada, is here (archived here).

Don’t you think that it’s just a little weird that they identified the ‘96’ on your utility bill remittance slip as ‘On-Us’? We submit that it’s called On-Us because those remittances are supposed to be paid by the Trustee…it’s on the Trustee to make a settlement out of the CRF to the beneficiaries. But with the Banks and the CPA in the middle of the process, the funds get funnelled away from the beneficiaries on the trail back to the rightful owners of that reimbursement.

As you can see, government bureaucrats and politicians are masters at confusion-tactics and gaslighting, and especially misrepresenting facts.

First the writer starts by belittling the requester of information specifically about the code ‘96’ and its location on every utility bill remittance slip, then they claim the existence of the ‘96’ is a myth, then they move to talking about how a creditor (utility) is identified, without ever stating that the Code ‘96’ is not part of the routing/transit number identifying the utility company.

This is only one of the many ways the ‘Trustee’ bilks the population (beneficiaries) out of their rightful share of the wealth of our landmass, despite the Queen’s purported guarantees. How can this all not amount to fraud and racketeering? And all-out treason when our money is sent to foreigners?

In addition, the writer of that letter fails to state how an individual is supposed to exercise their right to have their necessities of life paid for, if not through the remittance/settlement process? They are suggesting perhaps, that its also an ‘internet myth’ that the ICESCR was signed and ratified in 1976, guaranteeing access to the CRF for the necessities of life.

‘Consumer purchases’ refer to items used in a human being’s activities of daily living (e.g., clothing, food, electronics, appliances, heating, insurance, transportation). They are the purchases that most intimately frame a human being’s life: you live with these items and use them every day. Corporations and businesses are not ‘Consumers’.

It is only logical that a man or woman’s purchases for items of daily living are specifically designated in order that Canadians can access their rightful share of the CRF…there is only one way and that is by remittance slip with special coding to distinguish consumer purchases from all other purchases. That special coding is ‘96’.

The Bank is only supposed to facilitate your access to the CRF for your living expenses … to process your remittance slip through to the CRF. It should not be asking you for money…it should be submitting your remittance slip to the CPA, taking the money that the CPA accessed from the Consolidated Revenue Fund and sending that to the utility company to cover the utility bill.

But central banks are a massive, organized crime operation and this is one of the ways that it defrauds the public and steals their money. Since the government is a corporation too, these corporations all play ball together and all take their cut.

As you will see shortly, IF individuals could submit their remittance slips for reimbursement of Consumer Purchases directly to the Receiver General, and have the utilities bill paid for directly out of the CRF, or in the alternative, reimburse individual utility customers the amount they paid to the utility, the Banks and financial institutions would be completely cut out of the racket. They would be prevented from presenting OUR REMITTANCE SLIPS as their own and pocketing the value of the remittance slips that should have come back to us.

Evidence of Government and Bank Theft Destroyed

You will never know how much the political class is stealing because the Trustee government gave itself the legal right to steal and then destroy the evidence. THE THEFT IS IN THE TRILLIONS OF DOLLARS OVER DECADES.

FAA rules allow for the destruction after 7 years. However, it has been shown by the Auditor General of Canada that audited the tens of thousands of federal infrastructure projects purportedly funded by the then Minister Catherine McKenna, there was not a single document/record to be found for over 20,000 of those projects and the Minister would not produce or explain why -- and this was well before the 7-year FAA expiry date. Another example is when Payment in Lieu of Taxes (PILT) applications from municipalities are paid out, municipalities can and do immediately destroy all records of the payout received and all meetings to complete the details of those applications are secret. In addition, as you see from s. 36(2)(c) below, while the FAA has that 7-year rule, the Treasury Board can make regulations to delete records once payment has been made, which explains why the Auditor General often has difficulty getting the government to release financial records for audit.

Here’s one of those regulations from the FAA providing for the destruction of documents:

Destruction of Paid Instruments Regulations, 1996, SOR/97-238 (archived here):

Destruction
35(1) Subject to sections 3 and 6, at any time during the seventh year after an instrument has been paid, the Receiver General or the minister who issued the payment or settled the claim, as the case may be, shall destroy the paid instrument in accordance with subsection(2).
(2) A paid instrument shall be destroyed by shredding, pulping, burning, crushing, erasing or any other means that will ensure that the paid instrument cannot be reused.
6 If a paid instrument is required for the purposes of any litigation, claim, inquiry, investigation or other examination, the Receiver General or the appropriate minister shall delay destruction of the instrument until it is no longer required for that purpose.
Destruction of instructions for payment, records, etc.
36 (2) The Treasury Board may, on the recommendation of the Receiver General and with the approval of the Auditor General of Canada, make regulations governing
(a) the destruction of records of instructions for payment, including payment instruments, after the amounts specified in the instructions for payment have been paid;
(b) the destruction of claims for settlement; and
(c) the destruction of records of instructions for settlement, including instruments for settlement within or between departments, after settlement has been effected.

The bank theft of our monies out of the CRF started once our parents registered us with the government.

So how did it happen that banks could get between you and your patrimony (security known as the Trust)?

When born, you were the property of your parents -- until you were 18 years of age (no longer a minor). In law, children are property, because they are not legally competent to make their own decisions.

Your parents were provided with a record of your birth called a Statement of Live Birth.

As a human being born on this landmass, the Trustee government obligated to ensure that Her Majesty’s obligations to all humans was satisfied, was obligated to ensure that you benefited from the resources and wealth of our landmass. Because you were born a beneficiary of the wealth of the landmass, you were born a debt of the Queen (a corporate entity).

So that the Queen (corporation), could stop being indebted to you the human being, it needed to convert you into a fictitious legal entity without your parents realizing it. So, they told your parents to complete the totally voluntary Birth Certificate Registration. You went from being recorded as a human being to being registered to a corporation that created a name similar to yours, but not you.

To understand the importance of the difference between Record and Registration, please see here. EVERY TIME you register anything, including your marriage, you are transferring control to the corporation that owns the registry system.

That fictitious legal entity (the name on your Birth Certificate) is ‘security’ and ‘property’. Whether a stock certificate, a bond certificate or any other certificate, a certificate is property and property can be used as security.

The next step was to have a corporation (fictitious legal entity) hold that certificate until you were 18 years old and no longer a minor. Your parents became the caretakers/nannies of the child and nothing more.

The Bank Act, 1991 is a piece of fraudulent legislation that used lots of double-speak and legalese to make our corporate government (a fictitious legal entity) the security holder of the security that it created by distorting your given name to create your Birth Certificate, because your parents thought that the all-caps name on your Birth Certificate was you, when it wasn’t…it was a fictitious certificate name deliberately made to resemble yours to trick them.

Your parents were victims of fraud. At age 18 when you could have been free, the fraud continued. Your parents never got the money from the Trust that they needed to give you an adequate standard of living because the bank had agreed to let the government insert itself between you and the CRF (trust monies of all Canadians), with the deal being that the bank kept the money that should have gone to the beneficiary of the Trust (you). Now, as an adult, the bank comes between you and the fund through an intermediary, Payments Canada.

What the bank did, without your parents/guardian’s knowledge or consent, was create a constructive trust through constructive fraud, so that it could take constructive control of your ‘legal’ person (fictitious legal entity noted on your Birth Certificate that you were led to believe was you) when it dealt with Payments Canada.

Then it further defrauded you by keeping the money that it, as Trustee, was supposed to ensure you got to support you after Payments Canada got the settlement from the CRF. YOU are not a ‘legal’ person, which is fictitious, but rather a human being that was entitled to benefit from the wealth of the land you were born on.

Constructive possession of legal person

Here’s the fraudulent legislation that the de facto government corporation wrote to get at our monies in the CRF that is our patrimony (security in Trust) for our needs.

Remember that in legalese (not English) person means a fictitious entity created by the mind and written on paper as though a human being. You are an individual, created by another individual, not a fictitious thing created in someone’s mind. So just change the word ‘person’ to fictitious legal entity or corporation and it will be easier to understand the swindle:

Bank Act, 1991

So, the person (government) can act as the personal representative of another person (the all-capitalized name on your birth certificate) to displace your parents (human beings), and to act as your Trustee.

The bank can also treat a person (government) as the registered security holder, because the government registered itself as the owner of your Birth Certificate, which is a security. Take a look at your Birth Certificate and notice the stamps and signatures of the government officials and the absence of any mention of your parents.

Notice that the bank can’t actually do it in writing, but the effect of its actions is the same (meaning that it has constructively done so). See the definition of ‘constructive’ above.

The bank can do this ‘if the person (government) provides evidence it’s the registered security holder. (The government’s stamps and signatures are on the Birth Certificate it created and this is ‘evidence’ that it holds your birth certificate (security) and that it is registered because the date of registration is on the Birth Certificate security.

So, the person (government) provides the security (your Birth Certificate) which it registered to itself, as proof that the registered security holder (that was originally you the human being) is a minor (which the Date of Birth of the Birth Certificate security confirms).

The Bank Act, then states that the bank is not required to make sure that the actions of the government as a Trustee in respect of this minor is meeting its duty of care and obligation to act in the best interests of the minor, such as by making sure the minor gets his needs met from the CRF. This allows the corporate central banks to play ball with the corporate government and divert the minor’s Trust monies from the child to themselves.

The personal representative status that it appropriated for itself was only as long as you were a minor…there is no mention of adult in the legislation, only mention of ‘minor’.

No one knew that at 18 years old this ownership of you and the control the security holder bank had on your patrimony ended because the legislation did not allow for, and definitely should end if you asked for the security holder status over your Birth Certificate to be transferred to you as a competent adult.

Bank Act, 1991
Permissible registered holder
93 (3) If a person on whom the ownership of a security of a bank devolves by operation of law, other than a person described in subsection (2), provides proof of that person’s authority to exercise rights or privileges in respect of a security of the bank that is not registered in the person’s name, the bank shall, subject to this Act, treat that person as entitled to exercise those rights or privileges.

By operation of law you are no longer a minor requiring a personal representative when you reach the age of 18 years. Therefore, that they continue to treat you as a minor and never tell you that you can become your own registered security holder simply by providing evidence that you are 18 years old, is unconscionable, but obviously hugely profitable for the banks.

But, even when you learn how to devolve the constructive hold on your security (patrimony being your share of the Consolidated Revenue Fund for your needs of daily living), the bank refuses and ignores you.

Therefore, to this day, the government and the banksters make you believe that you must pay for the utilities, food and other necessities of life, while it appropriates the same amount from the CRF and keeps it for itself, instead of reimbursing you. In fact, it shouldn’t be taking money from you at all; it should just process the remittance slip as a claim on the CRF and disperse the resulting settlement to your creditors.

Learn more about ‘constructive fraud and trust’, lawful and legal here. Learn about all things ‘constructive’ and how it affects your life by accessing this special document. See this special document to learn how constructive theft by lawfare and zoning works against all property owners and for case law on ‘constructive takings’ by municipalities.

SUMMARY

WE HAVE GUARANTEES OF ALL THESE RIGHTS THEY MAKE US PAY FOR
WE ARE PAYING FOR RIGHTS that were arbitrarily reduced to privileges by a DEFACTO corporate GOVERNMENT UNLAWFULLY AND THROUGH TRICKERY
WE ARE STRIPPED OF OUR FUNDAMENTAL RIGHT to benefit from the wealth of our landmass WHEN THEY FORCE US INTO RECOGNITION AS A ‘LEGAL’ PERSON INCORPORATED INTO THEIR CORPORATION (eg. Citizen, inhabitant, class of persons, minor, subject etc.)
AFTER BEING FORCED INTO A LEGAL PERSONALITY CLASSIFICATION, WE ARE FORCED TO PAY FOR ALREADY ‘FREE’ RIGHTS.

WE ARE SUPPOSED TO ENJOY LIFE – NOW INSTEAD WE PAY TO LIVE AND WORK, AND PAY TO support a corrupt CORPORATE MONARCHY (dictatorship) and the WEF/UN (SLAVERY) WHILE THE WEALTHY AND POLITICAL CLASS ENGAGE IN LEGAL THEFT while pretending to be the Trustee of our landmass’s wealth and resources for our benefit.

Who needs a Trustee like that?

All individuals have their security (patrimony in Trust) seized by government at birth, unless the parents refrain from applying for a Birth Certificate and instead obtain a copy of the original Statement of Live Birth. (See our Series #2 NAME THEFT)

Corporations invest the Birth Certificates, which are created by a private corporation called the Canadian Bank Note Company using a distortion of your given name.
Children have no right to exercise appropriation from CRF, but a constructive registered holder arrangement allows Bank to exercise the child’s rights without the knowledge or consent of the parents.
The child’s ‘person’/security is to be used to meet child’s needs – instead the corporate government banks ‘represents’ the child, which they made into a ‘legal person’ also known as a ‘fictitious legal entity’ using the Birth Certificate. The bank is then free to swindle the child and his/her parents/guardians of their share of the Trust.
So, the Bank collects from the CRF what was actually paid by the parents, keeping the money for itself instead of reimbursing the the parents.
This corruption and enslavement does not stop once we reach adulthood -- we have to devolve this arrangement personally – but we don’t know this and even when we do try to devolve the arrangement, the corporation continues the fraud against us.

Be sure to also check out our UN INVASION of CANADA – ‘Peace Bait’ series (starting here), our MUNICIPAL FRAUD newsletters (starting here) and our PUBLIC-PRIVATE PARTNERSHIP RACKETS series (starting here) and our PROPERTY THEFT series starting here.

Also, please let us know if any of our hyperlinks have stopped working so that we can fix them. Thank you.

People-United
people-united.ca

Subscribe now

Tip via Kofi/Stripe

E-transfer tips within Canada:
ADMIN-PU@proton.me

Series #2 CODE '96' Deception Part 1 – How Canadians are Deprived of Billions of Dollars

People-United Uncensored — Thu, 20 Aug 2026 12:01:24 GMT

TAKE A MOMENT TO LOOK AT 2 or 3 OF YOUR UTILITY BILLS (those before they were changed to QR Codes in 2022).

If you pay by pre-authorized debit or credit, the utility bill is likely to have a QR Code. The coding on the remittance slips of your utility and other personal bills is now hidden in QR Codes that look somewhat like this:

On the remittance section of the bill that is not paid by auto-pay and does not have a QR Code, you will see a long line of coding at the very bottom. The line in the middle includes the utility number, the bank number, transit number and so on. But separated away to the right is the code number 96.

If you are a man or woman and it is not a business utility or other bill, but strictly the bill of a live man or woman, there will be the number 96 in the bottom right corner … look for it. It is in the same location on every remittance slip, even residential insurance invoices, and your income tax return remittance slip.

Code 96 is NEVER found on any bill related to commercial/business expenditures/services. It is found ONLY on bills associated with men and women.

Note that before 2021, the coding on the remittance slips attached to an invoice for personal services/items ONLY showed the Code 96 in the same location, at the bottom right of the coding line (see the image at the opening above). Suddenly in 2022, all coding at the bottom went missing.

By May 2023, with the installation of the Central Bank Digital Currency (CBDC), and the Great Reset digitalization enslavement, the coding was replaced by a QR Code.

The Income Tax Return Voucher (Remittance slip) FOR MEN AND WOMEN (not businesses) also denotes Code ‘96’ and some CRA notices even refer to ‘Individual Program’.

Municipal Property Tax Bills for private property (owned by men and women) also have a remittance slip with Code 96. See a redacted tax bill remittance slip with a barcode here. The ‘96’ code again is category On-Us in the Payments Canada Guide, indicating it should be paid out of the federal CRF.

In our Series #2 TAXATION FRAUD posts, we will shake you up with proof that individual men and women are not supposed to pay income tax on anything they earned with their OWN energy, labour and time, nor are they to be imposed on by property taxes on their private properties (residential homes and farms).

Here is a snippet:

Income Tax Act
taxpayer has the meaning assigned by subsection 248(1), but does not include a natural person or a partnership.

from s. 248 (1):

taxpayer includes any person whether or not liable to pay tax;

individual means a person other than a corporation;

How many times does Prime Minister Trudeau have to tell us that the ‘Budget balances itself’ before we realize that’s because it is fictitious, made-up, manufactured numerical story-telling designed to keep you distracted from what they are stealing from the People’s CONSOLIDATED REVENUE FUND, THAT BELONGS TO ALL CANADIANS?

Remember, the corporate government is supposed to be the Trustee that acts in the best interest of the men and women beneficiaries who live on the landmass, which includes using the revenue generated from natural resources, excise taxes and other revenue sources, to provide for the people (instead the corporations have reversed the situation and make themselves the beneficiaries of the wealth of the landmass).

Political language is especially deceptive language designed to keep YOU believing that taxes are essential to keep the country going, and should you dare question illegal taxation, it’s because you are a free-loader. Likewise, should you dare ask the ‘Trustee’ for enough services and benefits to be able to keep a roof over your head and decent food on the table, then you are automatically thrown even further to the side.

Budgets are designed by corporate governments to DECEIVE you.

Budgets are part of a government system of ‘double-speak’ and language trickery.

That trick language includes sending you a bill that says YOU owe the money, while hiding the fact that it is to be paid out of the TRUST (CRF) in a Code on the bill (Code 96).

If you don’t know what double-speak is and how it is used to trick you, read this excellent explanation (archived here) of double-speak, newspeak, and doublethink. How else can you protect yourself from being duped, or worse killed off without realizing it, unless you know the tactics the corporations masquerading as government use against you?

How can you make a good decision when you can’t even understand what was said? Here are 4 kinds of double-speak that are used on you EVERYDAY by politicians, bureaucrats and the media, to keep you from getting to the truth about things that directly affect you, such as ‘why there is a Code 96 on every utility bill’ sent to men and women, that is not on bills sent to businesses. Or ‘why can’t I easily access the Consolidated Revenue Fund (CRF) as do the corrupt banksters and politicians, even though they are not entitled but I am?

You can also listen to this video to hear double-speak tactics explained by an expert. Become an expert at recognizing when you are being double-speaked and gaslit! It could save you a lot of future distress.

Have you noticed how lawyers, doctors and politicians use jargon, leaving you wondering what they just said, and even guessing at what they meant? They make sure they use jargon with that air of arrogance suggesting that you are simply not smart enough or educated enough to be the experts they are.

Learn about how ‘jargon’ is actually an abuse of language to create insiders and outsiders, as well as about euphemisms, here (archived here).

Terminology is a favorite for the world stage political con artists knowing they can cover up their ulterior motives with confusing words. Combined with double-speak, they can make hate laws sound protective, when in fact, they deliberately target certain people for suppression of their freedom of speech and opinion. Another example is when they twist ridiculous levels of national debt as ‘an investment’ in the future.

As you will learn in this series, all efforts to learn just how Canadian men and women (beneficiaries) are to exercise their purported guaranteed right to the wealth and resources of the landmass are met with endless double-speak, gaslighting and when that does not work, they simply refuse to answer questions and even refuse legitimate Freedom of Information requests for records.

The right of men, women and their families to live off the wealth of the land is exercised in the Code 96, EXCEPT THAT BANKS ARE STEALING THAT RIGHT AND EXERCISING IT FOR YOU.

Canadians have been thoroughly brain-washed over many decades by communist masking terms that hide an agenda of socialism and Marxism, until we even believe that’s it’s quite ok for the service provider/trustee (government) to rob us blind, steal the future of our next generation and then dispose of us as ‘useless eaters.

Please take the time to watch “12 Historically documented tactics used by the Communist to capture the minds of Americans and collapse the US from within” (archived here). PLEASE NOTE THAT EXACTLY THIS SAME BRAIN-WASHING HAS HAPPENED TO CANADIANS AND OUR COUNTRY HAS COLLAPSED ALREADY, so simply substitute the words Canadians and Canada for Americans and US.

We have been force-fed communist masking terms such as Climate Change, diversity, multiculturalism, united nations, equality, benefits, sustainable development, tolerance, social justice, environmental justice, global values, family planning, reparations, white supremacy, racism, democracy, community standards, deconstructionism, right-to-die, political correctness, internet myth, conspiracy theory and so on -- all of which are intended to result, and do result, in chaos, higher illegal taxation, more and more wealth transfer schemes, and the exact opposite to peace, access to the truth, and the enjoyment of life.

The masking terms are never defined, which makes it easy for them to later claim you ‘misunderstood’ or ‘misinterpreted’ what was said.

The actual purpose of these terms is to mask the fact that all the money and property that rightfully belongs to the People -- because this is our land, not the communist’s -- is being stolen before our very eyes. And now, our fully communist government in Canada makes certain that we know that they take umbrage when we complain and call them on the theft!

Consolidated Revenue Fund belongs to all Canadians

The Consolidated Revenue Fund (CRF) is owned by the People and is managed by a trustee, a de facto for-profit corporation that we know as the Government of Canada. Learn about it here.

There is a Consolidated Revenue Fund at the provincial levels as well, but in this series, we will concentrate on how we are deprived of our right to access the CRF to pay our utilities and essentials of life.

That the CROWN is merely a trustee of the land (and resources) on behalf of the People was made clear in a New Brunswick dispute over fishing rights:

The Queen v. Robertson, 6 SCR 52, 1882 CanLII 25 (SCC),
[Page 126]
and the Dominion parliament has no right to give such authority; and also that the ungranted lands in the province of New Brunswick, being in the crown for the benefit of the people of New Brunswick, the exclusive right to fish follows as an incident, and is in the crown as trustee for the benefit of the people of the province, exclusively, and therefore a license by the Minister of Marine and Fisheries to fish in streams running through provincial property or private lands is illegal, and consequently the lease or license issued to the suppliant is null and void.

WE, the People are the true beneficiaries, but the trustee is stealing our money, and making us pay for what the trust should be covering.

Again, in an Indian Band issue, the Supreme Court of Canada in 2009 refers to the Crown as Trustee of land/resources on behalf of the People, with an obligation to the beneficiaries:

Ermineskin Indian Band and Nation v. Canada, 2009 SCC 9 (CanLII), [2009] 1 SCR 222
[…] Where the Crown is in the position of a fiduciary, although not strictly speaking a trustee at common law, and holds funds on behalf of a band, it is not improper to ascribe to the Crown a duty to invest those funds in the manner of a common law trustee, subject to any legislation limiting its ability to do so. […] [24] Teitelbaum J. noted that the Crown conceded that it was a trustee of the royalties, but he stated that he would have found the Crown to be a trustee even if the Crown had not conceded that it was. […] While the Crown, as a trustee, has the duty to invest according to the standard of “reasonable care and skill of an ordinary prudent person” (Samson reasons, at para. 670, Ermineskin reasons, at para. 278 ), the Crown discharged its duty as trustee to invest by paying a rate of interest under s. 61(2) of the Indian Act . […]

There are many other cases where the Crown is referred to as ‘trustee’ of property (the landmass) managed on behalf of the People. The monies deposited to the CRF is the property of the beneficiaries – the People.

The Department of Public Works and Government Services Canada, in its role as Receiver General for Canada, is responsible for the management and safeguarding of all federal government money (our money).

These funds-- which are used in the settlement of all Government of Canada expenditures, investments and transfers -- are held in the Consolidated Revenue Fund, at the Bank of Canada.

Funds may be collected by a department or a service provider (eg Canada Revenue Agency) and deposited to a concentrator account at a financial institution. Concentrator account balances are transferred each day to the Bank of Canada. Alternatively, funds may be deposited directly to the Consolidated Revenue Fund (CRF).

The CRF account contains all of the money earned by the Canadian landmass…gas, oil, lumber royalties, excise taxes, income taxes, etc. – this belongs to the People, not to greedy corporations pretending to provide services while stealing our wealth by using a corrupted English language called legalese (aka DOG-Latin). (See our Series #2 NAME THEFT for details.)

Financial Administration Act, R.S.C.1985

‘Consolidated Revenue Fund’ means the aggregate of all public moneys that are on deposit at the credit of the Receiver General;
‘parent Crown corporation’ means a corporation that is wholly owned directly by the Crown, but does not include a departmental corporation;
‘public money’ means all money belonging to Canada received or collected by the Receiver General or any other public officer in his official capacity or any person authorized to receive or collect such money, and includes
(a) duties and revenues of Canada,
(b) money borrowed by Canada or received through the issue or sale of securities,
(c) money received or collected for or on behalf of Canada, and
(d) all money that is paid to or received or collected by a public officer under or pursuant to any Act, trust, treaty, undertaking or contract, and is to be disbursed for a purpose specified in or pursuant to that Act, trust, treaty, undertaking or contract;

To see the data codes applicable to the Consolidated Revenue Fund, click here.

There are outflows from the fund, and inflow amounts and sources are kept in separate databases.

One dataset provides details of all deposits (inflows) made to the Consolidated Revenue Fund.

Consolidated Revenue Fund Outflows are available in a separate dataset.

The daily cash balances in the CRF are here and here.

THE TRILLIONS OF DOLLARS HORDED IN THE CONSOLIDATED REVENUE FUND and FUNNELLED TO THE CROWN (both British and Vatican) since at least 1931, is NEVER TALKED ABOUT IN MAINSTREAM MEDIA. It is mainstream media’s task to keep you focused on imposter Ministers of Finance and their deceptive Budgets.

If you check out our upcoming Series #3 CONSTITUTION/CHARTER FRAUD, you will learn that the British Parliament formerly cut Canada loose from the commonwealth by signing the Westminster Act, 1931. That was the time of the Great Depression and naturally the British Empire that was itself collapsing, did not want to continue to be associated with or responsible for a bankrupt corporation called the Government of Canada or CANADA.

Even though the Government of Canada was a defunct corporation, under the pretext that it was our ‘democratic government’, it still stole our money from the CRF and funnelled it to a Queen/Crown that wanted nothing to do with us. Therefore, you can understand why the state media (CBC) kept up the lie that she was the Queen of Canada, that Canada was confederated, and so on. After all, there is no reason for them to give up their access to our money if the People weren’t the wiser?

First, watch this short video explanation of the CRF here (archived here). It explains how a Canadian attempted to access the CRF for her needs of daily life, as was guaranteed by the Queen in 1976.

Remember that when you hear reference to GOVERNMENT OF CANADA, as we explained in our CORRUPT CORPORATE GOVERNMENT series, it is a for-profit corporation, that is supposed to be acting as a Trustee and not the self-serving globalist-controlled corporation it is operating as.

The money that goes in and out of the CRF is managed by a set of rules called the Financial Administration Act, R.S.C. 1985 that we will discuss shortly.

Ministers (politicians) have unfettered access to this fund and YOU can never know who is living in luxury from the fund because the government/trustee gave itself the right, through this Financial Administration Act (FAA) to destroy all records immediately upon payout from the fund if ordered by the Minister, but usually, according to the rules, after 7 years!

It has been shown by the Auditor General of Canada that audited the tens of thousands of federal infrastructure projects purportedly funded by the then Minister Catherine McKenna, there was not a single document/record to be found for over 20,000 of those projects and the Minister would not produce or explain why -- and this was well before the 7-year FAA expiry date. Another example is when Payment in Lieu of Taxes applications from municipalities are paid out, municipalities can and do immediately destroy all records of the payout received and all meetings to complete the details of those applications are secret.

So either we are burdened by the most incompetent corporate government trustee in the history of mankind or the most devious, diabiolical and treasonous.

Contrary to what you might think, the People never contracted with these Trustee corporations…they just forced themselves on the People almost 2 centuries ago, then used their mastery in double-speak and language manipulation to keep us enslaved to their corporate structure. It was a British corporate invasion for the SOLE purpose of raping and pillaging our resources and People. (The Queens/Kings were the owners of corporations, all controlled under the umbrella of the tradename ‘CROWN’.)

The present controlling CROWN represents the criminal cabal called the Vatican City, the oldest and largest corporation in the world that is a driver of the New World Order and global communism. To learn more about the Vatican in World Politics and its many holocausts by proxy, you can read the free books by the world’s leading expert on the Vatican provided here and here. You won’t be disappointed in the incredible information those works provide.
There is a Consolidated Revenue Fund (CRF) at every corporate government level and a Consolidated Statement of Account (also known as Consolidated Financial Statements) at every government level. You are never shown this Consolidated Statement of Account, only the fictitious Budget.

Financial Administration Act (FAA): rules for the Trustees benefit

As we mentioned earlier, what is taken from, or deposited into, the CRF is administered by a piece of legislation called the Financial Administration Act (FAA). This legislation lays out the rules to be followed by the Trustee, when taking in or moving out money from the CRF. Of course, it was the Trustee who wrote and passed this legislation.

ESSENTIAL READING: This special document will provide you with a summary of the legislation and rules that allows Canadians to be swindled out of their Claims for an adequate standard of living guaranteed by International Covenants binding on Canada.

As you will see, we, the true Beneficiaries of the Trust, should be provided the funds for an adequate living standard from our collective account -- the CRF -- but this legislation makes sure to leave out how an individual human being is supposed to do that.

They are fully aware what funds are to be provided for us because they identify them as Code 96 on bills we receive.

As you will also see, the trustee Government of Canada refuses to say how an individual is supposed to access the ‘adequate standard of living’ they are entitled to by law as the true beneficiaries of the wealth that the landmass produces.

In other words, the trustee Government of Canada is depriving the true Beneficiaries of Canada’s collective wealth, and stealing it for itself through deceptive legislation, double-speak and state-owned media.

A trustee stealing from the trust or depriving the beneficiary is committing a crime, but this de facto ‘trustee’ Canadian government is not prosecuted because WE think this is a legitimate government, and worse, they own the prosecutors and the courts too. (See our upcoming Series #3 CONSTITUTION/CHARTER FRAUD to see why since 1931, this is a criminal enterprise, not a government).

In addition, all monies from royalties -- lumber, gas, oil, mineral extraction -- and other income, including taxes and levies are to be available to all people living on this landmass Canada, by the trustee corporation to satisfy binding international treaty obligations and the guarantees that are legal undertakings:

Financial Administration Act, R.S.O. 1990
Definitions:
“statutory appropriation” means an amount that is authorized, under a provision of this or another Act of the Legislature that describes the amount as payable or capable of being recognized without any legislative authority other than the provision of the Act,
(a) to be paid out of the Consolidated Revenue Fund,
Minister of Finance to have charge
1.0.12 The Minister of Finance shall preside over and have charge of the Ministry of Finance and has power to act for and on behalf of the Ministry of Finance. 2009, c.34, Sched.J, s.2.
Duties and powers of Minister of Finance
1.0.14(1) The Minister of Finance shall direct and control the Ministry of Finance, recommend to the Executive Council finance, economic, accounting and taxation policy, supervise, direct and control all finance, economic, statistical and accounting functions, manage the Consolidated Revenue Fund and, except as otherwise provided in any other Act, manage all public money. 2009, c.34, Sched. J,s. 2.
Administration of Acts Payment for special cases
1.0.22(2) The certificate of the Attorney General or Deputy Attorney General that any money received by any officer or other person under this section has been duly accounted for is final and conclusive and the account shall not be subject to any further examination. 2009, c.34, Sched. J,s. 2.
Payments out of Consolidated Revenue Fund
11(1) Every payment out of the Consolidated Revenue Fund shall be made by cheque or by any other method of payment or transfer approved by the Minister of Finance in writing. 1996, c.24, s. 36.

2 sets of Books: Budget and Consolidated Financial Statement

The true state of Canada’s financial affairs is accounted for in the Consolidated Financial Statements, not the budget. In other words, there are two sets of books, just as there are in any other criminal organization. No one gets to cheat the Queen/CROWN out of what it steals from the commonwealth nations that she colonized. Budgets are used to deceive the People about how much the Queen/CROWN is stealing from the People – they are the cover story to hide what the government actually intends to do next.

Learn the difference between a budget and a Consolidated Financial Statement here.

IMPORTANT
The budget is not a true accounting tool as much as it is a propaganda hallucination. Budgets are merely a projection, a goal, a political target. All manipulated, fabricated, fictitious – that’s why Justin Trudeau says they balance themselves.

In accounting terms, a budget is referred to as inferior to the Consolidated Financial Accounts. Just because something is not budgeted for in the Budget, does not mean there is no money for it. All the opposite.

Municipalities horde billions of dollars, while presenting the public with fictitious propaganda about the state of financial affairs of the municipality.

It is important that you access our special document so that you can learn and be clear on how the imposter governments deprive Canadians of access to the Consolidated Revenue Fund that belongs ONLY to Canadians.

This CAFR swindle (archived here) is the biggest game in town and we also direct you to our Series #1 MUNICIPAL FRAUDS starting at Part 1 for more details.

The Budgets show lots of ‘gifts’ to the People when they are ready to increase taxes or make some other move against the People, such as a rigged election. Other times, such as when they want to avoid funding the end of veteran homelessness, they design the budget to show how short the government is of money.

Even hospitals, universities and any other corporations operating to extract money from the People to serve the CROWN (for-profit corporation) account to the penny in their individual Consolidated Financial Statements, because they are all for-profit enterprises (corporations), disguised as service providers.

A corporation dissolves unless it profits enough to stay solvent. EVERY CORPORATION, EVEN IF LABELLED NON-PROFIT or CHARITY, IS ULTIMATELY A PROFITEERING BUSINESS. ‘Non-Profit’ is double-speak for ‘a front to help the parent corporation avoid paying taxes’. It is a massively deceptive term.

See the CHARITY-FOUNDATION CRIMES series for details about how much of the money-laundering, trafficking and harmful programs are driven by what we have been duped into believing are ‘benevolent’ entities.

The Consolidated Financial Statements that the public is never educated about, show that the defacto for-profit corporations disguised as our governments (federal, provincial and municipal), horde billions of dollars that end up moved to the wealthy through various schemes such as foreign aid, humanitarian aid, LGBTQP support programs, incubator and venture projects, useless ‘social’ programs, grants to special interest groups, medical research, forgivable loans to big corporations (such as Loblaws, Irving Oil, Bombardier, Ford Motor Company), fake emergency measures such as COVID, foreign ‘agendas’ such as Climate Change, and so on.

Instead of benefiting from the wealth of OUR land and our labor, not only are Canadians forced to supply the Trustee of our land and the CRF, with money and resources for their unlawful use, but the Trustee ends up filling politician’s pockets in complex money-laundering schemes, creating war and poverty in 3^rd world countries in the process.

Click here for a list of the 444 Ontario Municipality surpluses being horded. Once the Excel Spreadsheet is opened, find your municipality, look at the FIR Schedule 70 entry, and look at line 9971. Line 9971 is the true Accumulated Surplus for 2019 (there was no Statement published for 2020. We get into more detail about these billions in municipal surpluses in our MUNICIPAL FRAUD series.

Municipal corporations are so masterful at double-speak, that they pass this Accumulated Surplus off as ‘not really a surplus’. Even experts are confused with their explanations that amount to having us believe that black is not black. Remember, double-speak is about convincing us that surplus is a deficit.

Doublespeak and political language is about convincing us not to believe our lying eyes.

See here a report from the C. D. Howe Institute sharing with the public the discrepancies between municipal Budgets and their Consolidated Financial Statements on the little matter of massive surpluses.

Roughly 6% of the trillions earned by the Canadian landmass is released to the People of Canada, normally as pensions, social services and the like, but most is clawed back eventually as unlawful taxes and levies. The balance of roughly 92-94% is sent overseas to the CROWN as ‘business’ revenue that is sheer profit. This is 100% enslavement.

When money is borrowed from the International Monetary Fund (IMF), thereby adding billions to the ‘national’ debt, in fact the borrowed money goes right back out again to the CROWN corporation, but through a series of rackets and schemes such as funding to the UN and the WHO, etc. IF the trustee of the CRF was not stealing our wealth, there would be no need whatever to ‘borrow’ from a foreign bank (IMF) as they do and no need for income taxation and levies (all of which are unlawful but made legal by legislation).

But consider what a great racket they have going…they borrow money from a foreign bankster (IMF), pocket the money, tell the People they have to pay it back and of course, when the time is right, the IMF will take the entire landmass over, just as any bank does when foreclosing on a mortgaged property. We are used as collateral for foreign corporate loans and our labour is used to pay back the loans at compound interest.

Fictitious Queen’s treaty and covenant ‘guarantees’ loaded with double-speak

In 1976, ‘Her Majesty’, which is a term that represents the CROWN, which was in turn a symbol of Elizabeth II’s vast corporate Empire, signed and ratified the ICCPR and ICESCR to guarantee human rights, the exercise of which would/should result in the end of corporate government theft of the trillions of dollars that it was sending to Vatican’s bank account every year, as well as an end to income taxation of individual men and women.
ICCPR is the acronym for International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, 1976.
ICESCR is the acronym for International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, 1976

There are many treaties, covenants, declarations and other paper tigers -- the new laws are without any method of enforcement.

To go further into what these ‘covenants’ and guarantees were, it is clear in the 21^st century Canada, that these documents were Trojan-horses arranged by the United Nations as a means of quietly invading sovereign nations – they were presented as ‘human rights’, in the typical ‘double-speak’ political language used against the common people, but they secured the United Nations Charter as the final ‘law’.

Please see our Series #1 UN INVASION starting at Part 1 to see how it was done by 2020 and how Canada came completely under the martial-law control of the United Nations. Please see our PROPERTY THEFT series and our upcoming ABORIGINAL INDUSTRY FRAUD SERIES to learn how the UNDRIP has stolen Indian lands using double-speak and undefined terms, as well as private properties across the nation.

The ICESCR lists many purportedly-guaranteed human rights.

One of those rights purportedly guaranteed to Canadians by Her Majesty in 1976, was the provision of an ‘adequate standard of living’ for everyone, whether they can or want to work.

STOP RIGHT NOW if you are thinking that a Canadian is a free-loader for wanting to live off the wealth of his own country’s resources. Know that this is the kind of thinking that keeps our ‘trustee’ able to steal. The elite parasites don’t feel that stealing from the CRF is ‘freeloading’ at all…they just want us to think that if we spend our own country’s wealth on ourselves, we should be ashamed. It’s called masterful brain-washing.

After all, if you have revenue coming in from your land, whether individually held (private property) or collectively held (landmass Canada, or native lands), then being that you are the owner of the land, you and not greedy corporations should be enjoying its fruits.

ICESCR (International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, 1976)

Article 11
1. The States Parties to the present Covenant recognize the right of everyone to an adequate standard of living for himself and his family, including adequate food, clothing and housing, and to the continuous improvement of living conditions.

*** NOTICE THAT THE GUARANTEE SAYS NOTHING ABOUT BANKS BEING ENTITLED TO ‘AN ADEQUATE STANDARD OF LIVING’

******An ‘adequate standard of living’ can be determined by considering what the government spends to keep an inmate in federal prison…roughly $50,000/year. THAT IS NOT THE SAME AS A BASIC INCOME WHERE PEOPLE ARE LEFT DESTITUTE, such as what you see with social assistance or in how veterans are ‘cared for’.

Basic Income is arbitrarily decided by bureaucrats loyal to the CROWN, which means they shortchange the beneficiaries to increase their corporate profits. As you have already seen, to them basic income is just enough to live on the streets.

An adequate standard of living means that EVERYONE has safe, secure lodging, nutritious food, essential transportation and the materials needed to complete the activities of daily living in dignity. Naturally, if one wants more than an adequate standard of living, one must work for it.

The Canadian landmass has in the past and can continue to produce far more than Canadians will ever need, if managed efficiently and effectively (and if not stolen by the elite political class to build the world government and Middle-east Mosques).

Moreover, the Canadian landmass is one of the easiest to manage, even for complete incompetents, because we have every renewable resource needed in abundance, including fresh water, lumber and minerals.

And we have incredibly resilient, resourceful, inventive native and European people who have built a wilderness into a landmass where millions want to immigrate to.

For a small population, we have a huge number of inventors. Inventing things helpful to humanity, such as the telephone or airplane used to be a labor of love.

However, once privatized by the criminal corporate governments of Canada and the provinces (originally set up and controlled by the CROWN), those resources were no longer available to the common man, without the common man paying heavily for them.

Canadians must wake up to the fact that we pay for what we already own.

This is the purpose and agenda of foreign corporate privatization of all of Canada’s resources. It also means that the domestic laws and guarantees of Her Majesty do not apply to private corporations, who can abuse the public at will.

Worse, Canadians have been disincentivized to invent and be resourceful -- and are even punished for being so.

It is quite the scheme…corporate government calls their purchase of various infrastructure for their personal profiteering ‘an investment for Canadians’, use OUR money to purchase them, and then turn around to charge us for the use or consumption of what was ours until cleverly stolen from us.

Except for high-level corporate insiders, no one gets a ‘dividend’ cheque from these ‘investments’. And certainly the ‘tax money’ used to make an investment that only insiders get to benefit from, is never returned to the People. In fact, in our POLITICAL FRAUD and TREASON series, we’ll explain how we even lost our country to foreigners.

Think of it this way: they take the money out of your pocket by forcing you to ‘invest’ in a private venture that they claim will benefit you. They never give you that money back, they pocket the profit from what is in reality YOUR investment, and eventually sell or transfer the investment to another corporation.

The sale price is never returned to the People who made the ‘investment’ possible in the first place. EVERY CORPORATION AND CORRUPT POLITICIAN GETS A PIECE OF YOUR WEALTH FOR FREE. Now, there is nothing left for you and your family!

All the fictitious Queen’s so-called guarantees are systematically ignored and violated using legalese, deceptive practices, fraudulent courts, public-private partnerships turned fully private and unaccountable, and the hiding of records and information that should be available to any ‘beneficiary’ (Canadian) on request.

And let’s not forget the double-speak they use relentlessly until we ‘tune’ out of political discourse altogether, much as we tune out a nagging spouse or parent.

It is fair to say that not a single treaty or Covenant the CROWN has ever signed has been honoured by the Government of Canada. Since 1931, no federal government existed that had any authority to sign anything, and since 1953 (fake crowning of Elizabeth II) no authority assented to anything. See our special document titled ‘Fake Queen-Royal Scam’ for details.

Our upcoming Series #3 CONSTITUTION/CHARTER FRAUD will help you understand how these greedy politicians and banksters can be so brazen, even to the point of forcibly and illegally locking down healthy people and depriving them of their means of subsistence for years, during which time they transfer even more wealth to themselves.

The Covenants state that the parties must provide measures by which individuals whose rights are violated, can be remedied. But as we mentioned above, these covenants are paper tigers with no means of enforcement.

The Covenants (ICCPR and ICSCR) don’t prohibit the ‘state parties’ from using deceptive legalese, double-speak, threats, and psychological operations to create fear and panic. They don’t address court rules impeding self-litigation, thereby making it impossible for the People to understand and use the laws and other ‘measures’ the government is legally obligated to make available. (See our LEGAL FRAUD series for how lawyers are at the root of all human hardships.)

Even when the individual does figure out the proper protocol to exercise their rights as beneficiaries of the Trust that manages the Canadian landmass for the benefit of the beneficiaries (the People), the corporate legal system still denies them the remedies and rights. It’s done by ‘court discretion’, including dismissing the claims of self-litigants without ever hearing the evidence or law.

In fact, even when presented with the applicable law, the Courts will refuse to consider the law, will side with the ‘trustee’, illegally reword the legislation from the bench, and then award the high ‘costs’ against the self-litigant to discourage the litigants from appealing the kangaroo hearing. (See more in our upcoming JUDICIAL FRAUD series.)

The ICESCR Article 2.1 states that ‘All peoples may, for their own ends, freely dispose of their natural wealth and resources…’. This means that you have the right to spend your money as you see fit and do with your assets as you wish, and when you do either, it must be for YOUR own ends, not the corporate government’s.

ICCPR (International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, 1976)
Article 1
2. All peoples may, for their own ends, freely dispose of their natural wealth and resources without prejudice to any obligations arising out of international economic co-operation, based upon the principle of mutual benefit, and international law. In no case may a people be deprived of its own means of subsistence.

Thus, income taxation of human beings is unlawful because you are not disposing of your money freely or for your own ends. When any human being has to give over against their will something they have earned, that is 100% enslavement. But income taxation and social insurance number deceptions have kept us duped for almost a full century. (See our upcoming TAXATION FRAUD and CONSTITUTION/CHARTER FRAUD series for more details.)

Adequate standard of living for all Canadians from the Consolidated Revenue Fund (CRF)

The corporate government is to provide individuals a mechanism to access an adequate standard of living from the CRF that belongs to all Canadians. As you have seen above, the mandate is provided in the International Covenants, and the provisions for doing so are provided in the Financial Administration Act, (FAA).

How do they know what is an adequate standard of living for each individual? It is the sum total of all the bills you pay – from utilities to house insurance, to property taxes to food and transportation, for starters. That is why Code 96 are on all these bills, but not on business bills.

Should be easy then, should it not? Unfortunately, the corrupt government/trustee does not provide an application form and does not state the procedure an individual is to follow to access the money from the CRF they are entitled to.

In fact, the government deprives us of not only the adequate standard of living, but the means to access it and to get remedy in the courts for the deprivation.

Before these corporations installed themselves by force on this landmass, fishing, hunting, selling food, plumbing, building a home, running a business, were all free. But the government trustee saw a chance to extort fees, levies and other monies from the People who were entitled to live their lives without such interference and criminality.

Article19.3 of the Financial Administration Act (FAA) facilitates their use of the operation of THEIR corporate law to force us to pay for rights we already have ‘free’. They do this by ‘incorporating’ us into their corporations (federal, provincial and municipal) without our knowledge or consent (see our CORRUPT CORPORATE GOVERNMENT and NAME THEFT series, as well as Series #1 MUNICIPAL FRAUD for more details).

Financial Administration Act, RSC 1990
Charges for services or use of facilities
19 (1) The Governor in Council may, on the recommendation of the Treasury Board,
(a) by regulation prescribe the fees or charges to be paid for a service or the use of a facility provided by or on behalf of Her Majesty in right of Canada by the users or classes of users of the service or facility; or
(b) authorize the appropriate Minister to prescribe by order those fees or charges, subject to such terms and conditions as may be specified by the Governor in Council.
Amount not to exceed cost
(2) Fees and charges for a service or the use of a facility provided by or on behalf of Her Majesty in right of Canada that are prescribed under subsection (1) or the amount of which is adjusted under section 19.2 may not exceed the cost to Her Majesty in right of Canada of providing the service or the use of the facility to the users or class of users.

[Our note: because you were incorporated into Her Majesty’s corporation by Birth Certificate and Social Insurance Number and other means, you are a class of user known as her ‘subject’. In addition, when the ‘service’ is provided by a private corporation unaccountable to the government, they no longer are obligated to provide the services ‘at cost’, which is what any Trustee should be doing.]

Charges for rights and privileges
19.1 The Governor in Council may, on the recommendation of the Treasury Board,
(a) by regulation prescribe the fees or charges to be paid for a right or privilege conferred by or on behalf of Her Majesty in right of Canada, by means of a licence, permit or other authorization, by the persons or classes of persons on whom the right or privilege is conferred; or
(b) authorize the appropriate Minister to prescribe by order those fees or charges, subject to such terms and conditions as may be specified by the Governor in Council.

You have no rights if you have to pay to exercise them and have to allow yourself to be incorporated into a corporation as a ‘subject’. You have NO rights if you cannot get the money from YOUR country’s production (wealth) to provide you and your family an adequate standard of living.

And all of the rights we thought were guaranteed, are actually not rights, but privileges we pay for, yet they were rights and free to exercise prior to the installation of this FAA that governs what comes in and what goes out of OUR collective account, the Consolidated Revenue Fund (CRF).

In Part 2 we will share the scheme that allows criminal politicians to raid the CRF and to deprive the People of their share in the wealth of the landmass.

Also, please let us know if any of our hyperlinks have stopped working so that we can fix them. Thank you.

People-United
people-united.ca

Subscribe now

Tip via Kofi/Stripe

E-transfer tips within Canada:
ADMIN-PU@proton.me

Series #2 NAME THEFT Part 8 Non-consensual Name Changes are Illegal

People-United Uncensored — Sun, 16 Aug 2026 12:02:49 GMT

WHY IS CHANGING OUR NAMES WITHOUT OUR CONSENT ILLEGAL?

Stealing our names and then distorting them to create a legal person (also called a trade-name) that looks somewhat like our true name is not only wholesale fraud, but illegal because under the Ontario Change of Name Act, no one can change another’s name without the consent of the individual whose name is being changed. See here the entire Act, but this excerpt makes the illegality clear:

Change of Name Act, 1990
Change of Name of Person over Sixteen
Application for change of name
4 (1) A person at least 16 years of age who has been ordinarily resident in Ontario for at least one year immediately before making the application may apply to the Registrar General in accordance with section 6 to change,
(a) his or her forename or surname or both; or
(b) his or her single name, if the person has a single name.
Consent required where applicant under 18
(3) An application by a child requires the written consent of every person who has lawful custody of the child.
Consents required
(2) The application under subsection (1) requires the written consent of,
(a) any other person with lawful custody of the child;
(b) any person whose consent is necessary in accordance with a court order or separation agreement; and
(c) the child, if the child is twelve years of age or older.

As you can see if you take a quick look at the Change of Name Act, there is a very long, detailed procedure involved in changing a given and surname, none of which can be undertaken by any corporation or individual other than the individual who seeks the name change or the individual who is a parent of a child under 12 years old.

Declaration of Right to Given Name – Meet the Execution Act

While the 3 levels of government enforce their tax liens on a fictitious legal entity that it has created by distorting and changing the man or woman’s true given name and do so without providing the legal authority they rely upon to act outside their authority, they also seek to violate s. 11 of the Execution Act, RSO 1990 which requires that no writ can bind lands unless the name of the debtor is sufficient, and the name of the debtor is sufficient only when the full given name is set out:

Execution Act, RSO 1990
Writ not to bind lands unless name of debtor sufficient
11 (1) Where the name of an execution debtor set out in a writ of execution is not that of a corporation or the firm name of a partnership, the writ does not bind the lands of the execution debtor unless,
(a) the name of the execution debtor set out in the writ includes at least one given name in full; or
(b) a statutory declaration of the execution creditor or execution creditor’s solicitor is filed with the sheriff identifying the execution debtor by at least one given name in full. R.S.O. 1990, c. E.24, s. 11 (1).
When writ binds land
(2) Subject to subsection (3), where a statutory declaration is filed under clause (1) (b), the name of the execution debtor set out in the writ shall be deemed to contain the given names affirmed in the declaration and the writ binds land from the time the declaration is noted in the index. R.S.O. 1990, c. E.24, s. 11 (2); 2024, c. 2, Sched. 8, s. 2.
Declaration not applicable re seizure and sale of personal property
(3) For the purposes of the seizure and sale of personal property, the name of the execution debtor set out in the writ of execution is not deemed to contain the given names affirmed in the declaration filed under clause (1) (b). 2010, c. 16, Sched. 2, s. 3 (17).

Everyday, corporate banks are literally stealing the homes of live men and women using writs that contain the legal entities they created long ago.

In addition, the Ontario Superior Court in Re Wilson, held that a given name is a name given at birth to distinguish it from the surname, family or ancestral name. It may also be a name subsequently assumed, although in Ontario a given name many only be changed by compliance with the provisions of the Change of Name Act, R.S.O. 1980, C. 62 and with consent of the affected individual. There are no provisions in the Change of Name Act facilitating the change of name of the inhabitant of a municipality by the corporate municipality.

Re Wilson, 1984 CanLII 1908 (ON SC)
1. At common law, a person is entitled to choose any name they wish. This principle of law was quoted by the Court in Vaughn-Hulbert (Re) from a decision in Re Rezek or Rennie, [1947] O.W.N. 21 at 23 (Co. Ct.) as stating that:
“Under the common law a person is at liberty to choose and bear any name he likes; he cannot be prevented from taking any particular name (except the right to a trade name… […] Speaking generally, the law of this country allows any person to assume and use any name, provided its use is not calculated to deceive and to inflict pecuniary loss”.

Further, the British Columbia Supreme Court held in 1983 that at common law a person was entitled to choose any name they wished. Note the trickery… a ‘person’, being a fictitious legal entity, can choose any name they wish for their fictious entity, but we presume the court is referring to individuals when they see that term ‘person’. A sovereign is not likely to wish to be known by a trademark or distorted name.

Vaughn-Hulbert (Re), 1983 CanLII 632 (BC SC)
[16] At common law a person was entitled to choose any name he wished and this principle of law is well stated in Re Rezek or Rennie, [1947] O.W.N. 21 at 23 (Co. Ct.):
Under the common law a person is at liberty to choose and bear any name he likes; he cannot be prevented from taking any particular name (except the right to a trade name), as English law does not recognize the absolute right of a person to a particular name to the extent of entitling him to prevent its assumption by another: Du Boulay v. Du Boulay (1869), L.R. 2 P.C. 430, where Lord Chelmsford, at p. 442, said:
“But the mere assumption of a name, which is the patronymic of a family, by a Stranger who had never before been called by that name, whatever cause of annoyance it may be to the family, is a grievance for which our Law affords no redress.”
The law prescribes no rules limiting a man’s liberty to change his name; he may assume any name he pleases in addition to or in substitution for his original name, and in adopting even the name or combination of names by which another person is already known he does not commit a legal wrong against that person; Halsbury, loc. cit.; Cowley (Earl) v. Countess of Cowley, [1901] A.C. 450 (H.L.).
In Cowley v. Cowley, supra, at p. 460, Lord Lindley says:
“Speaking generally, the law of this country allows any person to assume and use any name, provided its use is not calculated to deceive and to inflict pecuniary loss.” (The italics are Factor Co. Ct. J.’s.)

An individual whose name has been corrupted without their consent should be able to obtain remedy in a Court of competent jurisdiction and a Declaration prohibiting the Municipality (or any level of government and government agency) from unilaterally changing the individual’s name by incorrectly and inappropriately spelling and styling it, however, the Courts themselves engage in this criminal activity, as they are part of the business model of the corporate government.

The Government of Canada has published its specifications for the manner in which all government correspondence is to spell and style written materials, both in correspondence and on the internet. The Municipality’s action in corrupting the Applicant’s given name and refusing to correspond with her in her given name is a violation of the Government of Canada’s own requirements.

Therefore, the various corporations cannot change your name legally and might turn to trademarking your name…that is, creating an image of something that looks like your name and then owning that. But that too is illegal under the federal Trade-marks Act as follows:

Trade-marks Act, 1985 c T-13 (archived here):
‘person’ includes any lawful trade union and any lawful association engaged in trade or business or the promotion thereof, and the administrative authority of any country, state, province, municipality or other organized administrative area;
‘trade name’ means the name under which any business is carried on, whether or not it is the name of a corporation, a partnership or an individual;
‘use’, in relation to a trademark, means any use that by section 4 is deemed to be a use in association with goods or services;
When deemed to be adopted
3 A trademark is deemed to have been adopted by a person when that person or his predecessor in title commenced to use it in Canada or to make it known in Canada or, if that person or his predecessor had not previously so used it or made it known, when that person or his predecessor filed an application for its registration in Canada.
Prohibited marks
9 (1) No person shall adopt in connection with a business, as a trademark or otherwise, any mark consisting of, or so nearly resembling as to be likely to be mistaken for,
(k) any matter that may falsely suggest a connection with any living individual;

Section 9 (1)(k) of the Trade-Marks Act is explicit that any mark, such as the corrupted, distorted or altered name of an individual cannot be used in connection with a business.

It follows that if the Applicant is free to choose her appellation and no one and no legal entity is permitted to change it without the individual’s consent, the government is acting ultra vires its authority in assigning a capitalized, distorted and corrupted name to the individual without his/her consent.

What happens when an individual tries to correct their status in Canadian Courts?

Once people have learned that their given (birth) name was stolen and used for enslavement purposes by corporations, they try to take steps to correct the situation. Below is just one example of how the Judges will refuse to allow any discussion of the illegal changing of the rightful property owner’s given name on their property title by the corporation TERANET.

Here is a redacted copy of the testimony before Divisional Court seeking to return property to the safe recording system under the Registry Act and out of the corrupt TERANET Land Titles Act electronic system. At pages 24-27 and 30 (highlighted) you see how quickly the Judges closed down all discussion about the law regarding name changes and how it refused to hear anything about name change, distortion of given names into legal entities, etc.

After denying the appeal/judicial review, the Judges awarded costs against the property owner in the amount of $5,000. Here is the discussion the property owner had with the Attorney General regarding their effort to misrepresent the events of the appeal/judicial review and to insert the property owner’s given (birth name) after the entire proceeding and records referred to a legal entity.

After refusing to let the property owner’s given name be inserted in the ownership field of the Parcel Register to replace TERANET’s fictitious legal entity ‘owner’, they tried to have her, the individual, take responsibility for the costs awarded against the legal entity her given name was turned into.

The Appellant property owner refused to consent to allowing the government to bind her individually, using her given name, to a commercial proceeding that used a legal entity assigned to her without her consent. And she prepared her response to the Attorney General’s motion to have the Judge settle the wording of the Order, at which time she would presumably get to discuss the illegal name distortion which they prohibited her from discussing during the hearing-- the Attorney-General did not pursue the matter further.

Can knowing of the illegal changing of a name stop a foreclosure?

Now, let’s see how the changing of your name and then foreclosing on your home might work out should the homeowner or Sheriff know and follow the law that financial corporations readily ignore because long ago they changed the name on the title of your property to a fictitious legal entity.

Even if the homeowner and the Sheriff know the law and are prepared to use it, the Courts in Canada will violate the law to keep up the scam, as they are part of it.

To see how the corporate government and the unaccountable TERANET land management corporation in Ontario stole title to your Ontario property, visit our Series #2 PROPERTY THEFT starting at Part 4 and running through to the end of Part 5. As you will learn, they know they are engaging in criminal activity, they know we know they are doing so AND THEY DON’T CARE.

We introduced you to this Ontario Executions Act earlier, but it bears repeating. While refreshing yourself about what it means in foreclosure circumstances, read on keeping in mind the government’s own rules on styling names, we see that those very rules are reflected in this Act as follows:

Executions Act, RSO 1990, c E.24 (Ontario) (archived here):
When writs of execution are binding
Against personal property
10 ( 1) A writ of execution against real property and personal property or against only personal property and any renewal of it binds the personal property against which it is issued from the time it is filed with the sheriff and entered into the electronic database maintained by the sheriff as the index of writs of execution.
Writ not to bind lands unless name of debtor sufficient
11 (1) Where the name of an execution debtor set out in a writ of execution is not that of a corporation or the firm name of a partnership, the writ does not bind the lands of the execution debtor unless,
(a) the name of the execution debtor set out in the writ includes at least one given name in full; or
(b) a statutory declaration of the execution creditor or execution creditor’s solicitor is filed with the sheriff identifying the execution debtor by at least one given name in full.
When writ binds land
(2) Subject to subsection (3), where a statutory declaration is filed under clause (1) (b), the name of the execution debtor set out in the writ shall be deemed to contain the given names affirmed in the declaration and the writ binds land from the time the declaration is received for execution and recorded by the sheriff.
Declaration not applicable re seizure and sale of personal property
(3) For the purposes of the seizure and sale of personal property, the name of the execution debtor set out in the writ of execution is not deemed to contain the given names affirmed in the declaration filed under clause (1) (b).

Given that the government has mandated that people be addressed by their given name styled as per The Canadian Style Manual, anyone who distorts our givens names as the corporate government and other corporations do, without our consent, and often despite our demands that our names be styled correctly to reflect our status as human beings, they are subjecting us to a great indignity and violating our basic human rights.

ALL CAPITALIZATION--moved a country from free republic to corporatocracy

How powerful ALL CAPITALIZATION really is in western countries is seen in how capitalization of the country’s name moved a country from a free republic to a corporatocracy when the people were unaware during the Great Depression of the 1930s!

The commercial system and likely every lawyer knows that all capitalization of individual names (as we showed above) and important terms referring to individuals is EXTREMELY IMPORTANT.

Did you ever wonder how the Republic of United States, a status won in 1776 by way of a war against the British monarchy (corporation), became The United States of America Inc. in 1871, almost 100 years after having gained freedom from corporate enslavement?

Lawyers took the words We the People that referred to the men and women of United States in the Constitution, and did this with it:

WE THE PEOPLE

As you learned earlier, this is DOG-Latin and is meaningless!

The founding fathers had not all capitalized ‘We the People’ because the document was intended to protect the men and women of the land.

Being that at the time during the Great Depression few could find something to eat let alone keep an eye on their government, the men and women (People) became legal entities THE PEOPLE. Until corporations are dismantled, traitors executed and the Republic restored and The People reclaim their human status in their Constitution, they remain nothing but assets of the corporation.

A summary of the full explanation is available here.

In 1871 a seditious act was performed by the Government of the day. A coup was made to rewrite the US Constitution and put WE THE PEOPLE in all capitals, under a new corporate contract transferring the United States of America into the new Corporation of the United States of America which transferred the power of We the People and the constitution over to the new corporation. When they did that, it placed the citizens in the United States as property of the Corporation which was centered in Washington D.C.. This action made Washington D.C. a FOREIGN ENTITY on American soil of sovereign states. It was established through a loan from the Vatican when D.C. was transferred into a city-state, and this corporate entity then ruled over the people. Citizens rights were taken from them in this process. No one realized this.

This is what Donald J. Trump and the US Military are reversing since 2017 – cleaning the swamp of corporations and traitors, restoring the Republic of United States and putting their Constitution back in the hands of ‘We the People’, so that human beings are again in charge of the land mass and government.

From 1913 to 1921, then President of United States Woodrow Wilson had finished the task of turning this magnificent free country into a corporatocracy when he installed the private corporation called ‘Federal Reserve’. This would affect all western nations, especially Canada, where only 10 years later, the birth certificate and social insurance number trap would be set for the debt enslavement of every Canadian man and woman, while mega corporations would steal the landmass for profit.

Here is a quote from Edward Mendel House during a private meeting with Woodrow Wilson, President between 1913 and 1921, from the private papers of Woodrow Wilson, transcribed from a historical audio-recording accessible here (archived here):

“Very soon every American will be required to register their biological property in a national system designed to keep track of the people and that will operate under the ancient system of pledging. By such methodology we can compel people to submit to our agenda which will affect our security as charge back for our fiat paper currency.
Every American will be forced to register or suffer not being able to work and earn a living. They will be our chattel and we will hold the security interest over them forever by operation of law merchant under the scheme of secured transactions. Americans by unknowingly or unwittingly delivered the bills of ladening to us will be rendered bankrupt and insolvent forever to remain economic slaves through taxation secured by their pledges.
They will be stripped of their rights and given commercial value designated to keep us a profit that will be none the wiser. For not one man in a million could ever figure out our plans and if by accident one or two would figure it out. We have in our arsenal plausible deniability.
After all, this is the only logical way to fund government by floating liens and debt to the registrants in the form of benefits and pledges. This will inevitably reap us huge profits beyond our wildest of expectations and leave every American a contributor to this fraud which we will call social insurance. Without realizing it, every American will insure us for any loss we may incur and in this manner every American will unknowingly be our servant.
However, begrudgingly, the people will become helpless without any hope for their redemption and we will employ the high office of the President as our dummy corporation to foment this plot against America. Having established plausible deniability, even if people become enlightened that they had a remedy and pursued it, the attorneys, judges, and legislators could claim that they did not understand the people’s claims, especially if the technical requirements for achieving it were not followed pursuant to statutory requirements. Requiring the public schools to teach civics, government, and history classes out of federally approved, politically correct textbooks written by the publishing houses owned by the owners of the Federal Reserve would assure that the people would not discover the remedy for a long time, if ever.”
~ Edward Mendel House to Woodrow Wilson

Woodrow Wilson had to be the worst president in the history of the US, he had no knowledge of how Gross Domestic Product (GDP) worked. He let banking cartels take advantage of his ignorance to establish the Federal Reserve (a massive banking monopoly) in 1913 which was when the free American republic’s demise started. By 2016, the death of the republic was all but accomplished and there was no financial freedom for the 90% of Americans who make less than a $100K salary; they are wage slaves.

The Wilson administration sold Americans down the river. The commercial Income Tax and the Federal Reserve System were both entered into law during the Wilson administration.

By 1931, the communist corporate contagion had become well entrenched in Canada and the Birth Certificate and Social Insurance Number system was launched, as was the taxing of individual men and women operating in the private and not in commerce – a totally unlawful form of slavery. See our upcoming TAXATION FRAUD series for details.

In 2016, the President Donald J Trump administration started to reverse the death spiral, the Federal Reserve was rolled into the Treasury Department and no longer gets to print money. The entire fiat banking system run by central banks has collapsed and all currency must now be backed by hard assets. It is hard for the common man and woman to understand the monumental shift undertaken since 2016 to rescue the Republic of United States because media and corporate pirates operating out of the British Empire have done such a thorough job of hoodwinking us.

Unfortunately, in Canada we do not have a Republic YET, but if we work together, the nation-state Ontario can exercise its legal and lawful right to install a proper Constitutional Republic with enumerated individual rights and freedoms. We can have an end to fiat currency printed in mid-air by computers controlled by criminal central banksters. New Ontario can then pass the Constitutional Republic template on to the other provinces. See our upcoming SOLUTIONS series when it is published.

Horrors of Digital Identity and Digital Identity Guardianship!

In sync with the COVID plandemic launch, a group of psychopaths working for the Government of Canada published this document (archived here) laying out how transhumanism (via the mRNA injections they were planning to force on us) will be part of our future. The document titled ‘Exploring Biodigital Convergence What happens when biology and digital technology merge’ outlines its plans to merge our bodies/minds with their artificial intelligence, resulting in complete remote control of our entire existence. Clearly the lure is intended to be the ‘convenience’ of ‘digitalized everything’ – tap credit and debit cards, as just one instance.

First, they stole our given (birth) names, distorted them to create legal fictions that they own. Now they are turning these legal fictions into digital identifications. The United Nations that has run this Canadian landmass since 1985, tells us that we are not human with human names, but digits that their corporate allies alone control.

See UN Announces Biometric Digital ID Wallet here and The Guardianship and Corporate Ownership Program here.

Once everyone is vaccinated with the mRNA vaccines, such as the COVID vaccines, everyone will have been implanted with a microchip that will replace the paper Birth Certificate and the CUSIP identifier number.

The nanotechnology is designed to make its way into the child’s brain, never to be removed. The child, unlike when he can sever the constructive hold on his name and birth certificate presently (although the corporate government does not make it easy), cannot reverse the implantation and is controlled in body and mind forever more.

***Once an individual is micro-chipped they become part of the ‘digital identity guardianship’ system where corporations own and control the individual as a chattel, to be bought and sold as required. Learn more about this in our VACCINE FRAUD series.

IT IS IMPORTANT TO READ OUR TRANSHUMANISM series when it is published because those who have been injected with mRNA vaccines, have been deemed by the US Supreme Court to no longer have ‘human’ status, but ‘transhuman’ status, due to the changed DNA.

The corporation created a brand-new human-like individual by changing the original DNA, just as they changed the DNA of corn to create a specie of corn never seen in nature. This is called genetic engineering and whoever created the genetically-modified thing that is not otherwise found in nature, OWNS it.

CONCLUSIONS

None of the actions required to steal our given names and turn us into commodities owned by corporations can happen without lawyers.

‘Public and International Notice of Personage and Barratry Crimes’ (archived here) by Anna Von Reitz, published June 6, 2022, explains why the BAR lawyer associations must be outlawed world-wide if people are ever to be free of all this corruption and deception.

“We have uncovered a massive conspiracy by members of the Bar Associations to commit personage crimes against all nations and countries.
Crimes of personage consist of impersonation and barratry.
In the first step, someone or something is mischaracterized as someone or something else, or is misrepresented as standing in a foreign jurisdiction or political status or legal capacity --- as in “impersonating a police officer”.”

~ Anna Von Reitz

This is all why the common people must kick corporations to the curb, install a constitutional republic on their landmass, and end the theft of our names asap. There is NO other way to escape the enslavement.

Also, please let us know if any of our hyperlinks have stopped working so that we can fix them. Thank you.

People-United
people-united.ca

Subscribe now

Tip via Kofi/Stripe

E-transfer tips within Canada:
ADMIN-PU@proton.me

Series #2 NAME THEFT Part 7 All Canadians Have Been Trafficked to the World Government

People-United Uncensored — Thu, 13 Aug 2026 12:02:31 GMT

After the UN took over the governance of Canada in 1985, through the legislation titled the United Nations Act, 1985, the Securities Transfer Act, 2006, SO 2006, c 8 (STA) was passed. See Series #1 UN INVASION for details.

In the Securities Transfer Act (STA) of Ontario, the term ‘person’ is defined as:

“person” means an individual, including an individual in his or her capacity as trustee, executor, administrator or other representative, a sole proprietorship, a partnership, an unincorporated association, an unincorporated syndicate, an unincorporated organization, a trust, including a business trust, a corporation, a government or agency of a government or any other legal or commercial entity;

Don’t let it confuse you that the definition of ‘person’ includes individuals. Remember that the definition is limited to the list that comes after the term ‘including’. Remember that the terms ‘includes’ and ‘including’ have a limiting effect. In this definition of ‘person’, the ‘individual’ referred to is limited to those in an official position, and does not include common men and women not holding those positions.

The STA refers to transferring ‘securities’ such as your Birth Certificate, which by virtue of being a certificate, is a ‘security’ that has financial value and can be transferred through sale, trade and so on.

Of course, the STA does not mention men and women, because once your parents used their authority to ‘transfer’ you to the control of the corporations that we think are our Provincial Governments, the Provincial Governments created a transferrable security for its new certificated property that includes your legal entity name (legal entity name = distortion of your given name).

You might argue that they refer to individuals which are defined as human beings in the law dictionary. But note that in the definition of ‘person’ above, it only refers to an individual so long as they act not as human beings, but as a trustee, executor, administrator or other representative.

Yes, if the corporate government had not been so corrupt, they would have simply stated ‘person’ means trustee, executor, administrator or other representative, …. But it is important for their fiction to be as confusing and complex for humans as possible.

The STA allows for the buying, selling, trading and all sorts of means of transferring the ownership of your legal entity certificate. Because you believe that the distorted name they call ‘legal entity’ is you the human, you end up serving the corporation or individual the birth certificate is transferred to.

The following are the definitions that together render you a legal entity to be controlled in whatever way the corporations choose and that can be transferred to the control of the World Government and United Nations.

Securities Transfer Act, 2006, SO 2006, c 8 (archived here) [underling ours for emphasis]

“endorsement” means a signature that, alone or accompanied by other words, is made on a security certificate in registered form or on a separate document for the purpose of assigning, transferring or redeeming the security or granting a power to assign, transfer or redeem the security;
“financial asset” means, except as otherwise provided in sections 10 to 16,
(a) a security,
(b) an obligation of a person that,
(i) is, or is of a type, dealt in or traded on financial markets, or
(ii) is recognized in any other market or area in which it is issued or dealt in as a medium for investment,
(c) a share, participation or other interest in a person, or in property or an enterprise of a person, that,
(i) is, or is of a type, dealt in or traded on financial markets, or…
“government” means,
(a) the Crown in right of Canada or in right of Ontario or another province of Canada,
(b) the government of a territory in Canada,
(c) a municipality in Canada, or
(d) the government of a foreign country or of any political subdivision of it; [think UN, World Government]
“issuer”,
(a) with respect to a registration of a transfer of a security, means a person on whose behalf transfer books are maintained,
(b) with respect to an obligation on or a defence to a security, includes,
(i) a person who places or authorizes the placing of the person’s name on a security certificate, other than as authenticating trustee, registrar, transfer agent or the like, to evidence,
(A) a share, participation or other interest in the person’s property or in an enterprise, or
(B) the person’s duty to perform an obligation represented by the security certificate,
(ii) a person who creates a share, participation or other interest in the person’s property or in an enterprise, or undertakes an obligation, that is an uncertificated security,
(iii) a person who directly or indirectly creates a fractional interest in the person’s rights or property, if the fractional interest is represented by a security certificate,
(iv) a guarantor, to the extent of the guarantor’s guarantee, whether or not the guarantor’s obligation is noted on a security certificate, and
(v) a person that becomes responsible for, or in place of, another person described as an issuer in this definition;
“person” means an individual, including an individual in his or her capacity as trustee, executor, administrator or other representative, a sole proprietorship, a partnership, an unincorporated association, an unincorporated syndicate, an unincorporated organization, a trust, including a business trust, a corporation, a government or agency of a government or any other legal or commercial entity;
“protected purchaser” means a purchaser of a certificated or uncertificated security, or of an interest in the security, who,
(a) gives value,
(b) does not have notice of any adverse claim to the security, and
(c) obtains control of the security;
“registered form” means, in respect of a certificated security, a form in which,
(a) the security certificate specifies a person entitled to the security, and
(b) a transfer of the security may be registered on books maintained for that purpose by or on behalf of the issuer, or the security certificate states that it may be so registered;
“security” means, except as otherwise provided in sections 10 to 16, an obligation of an issuer or a share, participation or other interest in an issuer or in property or an enterprise of an issuer,
(a) that is represented by a security certificate in bearer form or registered form, or the transfer of which may be registered on books maintained for that purpose by or on behalf of the issuer,
(b) that is one of a class or series, or by its terms is divisible into a class or series, of shares, participations, interests or obligations, and
(c) that,
(i) is, or is of a type, dealt in or traded on securities exchanges or securities markets, or
(ii) is a medium for investment and by its terms expressly provides that it is a security for the purposes of this Act;
“security certificate” means a certificate representing a security, but does not include a certificate in electronic form;

Please read these definitions and the rest of the Securities Exchange Act, 2006 together with the Personal Property Security Act, RSO 1990, c P.10 (archived here) to fully understand the process of converting you into a legal entity and then trading your legal entity as an asset.

Your name was distorted to create a legal entity. The legal entity created a certificate/financial instrument. The financial instrument is traded/sold.

Your Birth Certificate card names the owner of the birth certificate and the date it was registered, making it a ‘registered security certificate’.

As a registered security certificate, it can be traded on the open market and transferred to the ownership of another corporation, including a foreign state.

Now we move to the transfer of Canadian Citizens and their birth certificates to the World Government (a foreign corporation) to thereafter be called ‘Global Citizens’ and not Canadian Citizens. Citizens are legal entities, not men and women.

See here the Press Release about Governor General Payette and others received World Government awards for creatively moving us from Canadian Citizens to Global Citizens.

See here the Global Citizen Awards handed out by UNA-Canada. And here is the list of the companies sponsoring this trafficking of Canadians at the UNA-Canada’s Global Citizen Award 2019.

They start Canadians young: Here is the Youth Global Citizen Prize 2023 | UNA-Canada. This article is titled ‘Global Citizen Apathy is Boring Wants Youth to Make Their Voices Heard This Election’. How better to indoctrinate our youth to global enslavement than to have them participate in creating their enslavement?

Thus, one corporation trades or sells our legal entity called Canadian Citizen the proof of which is the birth certificate (security certificate), to the World Government Corporation and it changes our security’s political status to ‘Global Citizen’.

Of course, the selling of humans is a crime against humanity and is slavery, but technically, they are not selling YOU the flesh, but your legal name and that legal name is identified by a security certificate, the creator of which was the private, for-profit corporation.

By turning you into a legal entity (your given and surnames in reverse order, with commas and all capitalization), you are no longer human in law, and therefore, transferring ownership of a certificated legal entity/property attached to your legal entity is perfectly legal.

The problem is that ‘flesh and bones’ men and women were misled to believe that the new legal entity/name they created on the Birth Certificate (security) was them and that the certificate referred to a human being, created not by the government, but by a human being.

That is why, to be able to trade legal names as property, the government had to certify that the names were ‘security/property’, then register themselves in the government’s Vital Statistics office and finally sign off as the owner/issuer of the Birth Certificate.

But, as we explained above, first they had to convince your parents to ignore your STATEMENT OF LIVE BIRTH and accept the transfer of their property (child) to a new owner. Until the age of majority, a child is property.

Of course, parents have always been tricked. The Securities Exchange Commission (SEC) listing for our federal and provincial governments under various corporate names, makes it clear that our registered birth certificate securities are being traded on an open market.

Never does the parent’s names appear on the Birth Certificate; what appears is the signature and name of the Director of Vital Statistics--the owner of the legal entity to whom the birth certificate security was ‘registered’, as well as the date of registration by the new ‘entitled owner’ of the birth certificate security.

Know your strawman! Humans tricked to take responsibility for the legal fictions created by banks

After a couple of years of investigating the various claims that the Bank of Canada held our Birth Certificates and was investing them on the bond market, Freedom of Information requests yielded an admission that the Bank of Canada does not hold our Birth Certificates and does not create them…the private corporation Canadian Bank Note Company does.

See here the Privacy Commissioner’s (Freedom of Information Branch) email to a requester containing the following statement from the Bank of Canada:

“I then conveyed the following information to you regarding the relationship between the BC and the Canadian Bank Note Company:
“The Bank of Canada has an agreement with the Canadian Bank Note Company {CBN} for the supply of bank notes. CBN is a private company. It provides printing services to many other countries and organizations. The Bank of Canada is not responsible for CBN nor does it have control over the documents that it produces. That being said, we can confirm that the Bank of Canada did not receive nor does it have in its possession a birth certificate that relates to the complainant.11

The Canadian Bank Note Company is an unaccountable, private, for-profit corporation that creates Birth Certificates by distorting the true name of the individual Canadian, enslaving them to corporate control forever.

Statement of Live Birth that is recorded with Vital Statistics Registry of the Province you were born in, is completed by the parents, or other individual who helped deliver the baby.

Suddenly this information is sold by the provincial government corporation to the private corporation named Canadian Bank Note Company that then distorts your given name into a fictitious legal entity, creates a tradable security certificate and sells the certificate.

The ownership of the ‘legal person’ created by distorting your name and creating a tradable security printed by the Canadian Bank Note Company -- complete with the security certificate and CUSIP # -- is regulated by the Canadian Ownership and Determination Act which can be seen here or here on the government website until it is taken down.

There can be no doubt about it, we are all bought and sold like cattle by criminal corporate human traffickers masquerading as ‘government’ and protected by their own ‘rules’.

You Sign on the Line – But Is it Really Just a Line?

The corporate government cannot have its slaves learning that they are merely an ‘agent’ of the fictitious legal entities created by these corporations, so they hide all revealing information, including on your personal cheques.

Another term synonymous with fictitious legal entity and mostly used in the USA and the UK is ‘strawman’ (or straw man). Click here for a great explanation. In Canada, even though ‘strawman’ is a legal term, Canadians have been ridiculed by Judges for using it.

There is no way to have the corporate printer that prints the blank personal cheques style your given name (to reflect your status as a human being). Only the corporate printer can print cheques, and it will only print your blank cheques with the all caps (all capitalized) name of the fictitious legal entity (strawman) that it created by unethically and unlawfully appropriating your given name and surname. (Try correcting them to see for yourself.)

The MP next to the signature line is short-form for Micro Print. When blown up 100x or looked at using a very strong magnifying glass, this is the deception you see:

Thus we see that by distorting our names at birth, creating legal entities that are then used on ‘security certificates’ complete with CUSIP numbers required in commerce, and tricking us into believing that government corporations can rule over us and make us pay for what is in fact our equal right to the wealth of the nation, the slave trade is in full force despite the Universal Declaration of Human Rights 1948 (see here) and the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, 1976 (see here) and the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, 1976 (see here).

Legal Name: the Master Key to Enslavement

Legal Name v. Given Name: the master key to the entire Crown Corporation enslavement game is the legal name that a man or woman are tricked into thinking is their given (birth) name and that they are responsible for anything done or not done in that legal name.

The legal name -- which is a fictitious moniker concocted by the corporations -- is the lynch-pin to the entire legal system of control of every man, woman and child.

Without your consent (implied or expressed) to be that legal name, the legal enslavement system cannot live off the energy, time and labor of the man and woman, nor transfer any of their wealth to themselves.

It is only YOUR CONSENT to be, use, or have the legal name that is required for your absolute physical, mental and spiritual enslavement to be in full force and effect, with the man and woman to be the SLAVE and they to be the MASTERS.

How much of one’s life is enslaved is determined by looking at how many times their given name is distorted and used by the government corporations and even non-government corporations. Every time one registers (instead of merely ‘records’) themselves or their children or other property, such as their marriage, they are consenting to be the LEGAL NAME assigned by the corporation.

Also, please let us know if any of our hyperlinks have stopped working so that we can fix them. Thank you.

People-United
people-united.ca

Subscribe now

Tip via Kofi/Stripe

E-transfer tips within Canada:
ADMIN-PU@proton.me

Series #2 NAME THEFT Part 6 Your Distorted Birth Name is Worth Money

People-United Uncensored — Sun, 09 Aug 2026 12:01:47 GMT

Let’s take a look at just how this theft of our given names operate in the commercial world (you know, that world of fiction that treats us like data points and commodities).

Absolutely must watch (archived here) a Power Point presentation regarding how your Given Name was turned into a Trade Name/Strawman that you unwittingly take responsibility for every time you sign your given name on a negotiable instrument, such as a personal cheque.

Note: the video uses American UCC Code provisions to explain how we are tricked and explains the correct way to sign one’s name. However, the same UCC principles generally apply across Canada for all but Article 3 of the UCC.

In common law states, such as Canada’s provinces (except Quebec), the PPSA (Personal Property Security Act) is comparable to the UCC, except regarding UCC Article 3, but varies from nation-State (former ‘province’ before 1931) to nation-state. The principles are the same and the nation-States (formerly provinces) unique PPSAs were modeled after the UCC especially the UCC’s Article 9.

We will get back to the difference between the Canadian PPSA and American UCC in a moment but first let’s deal with the subject of the video, UCC Article 3 (UCC-3).

Article 3 of the UCC sets out in American law how an individual can avoid being tricked into taking responsibility for the tradename/legal entity/strawman assigned to them by government and corporations.

The comparable in Canadian law to the UCC Article 3 which is the subject of the video is NOT the PPSA, but the federal Bills of Exchange Act, 1985.

** NOTE: there is no definition in the Act of ‘person’, no mention of ‘natural person’ or ‘private person’, so this is a commercial document regulating commerce between ‘persons’ where ‘persons are corporations, associations, etc’ THIS IS IMPORTANT BECAUSE AS YOU LEARNED FROM Part 3, ‘person’ is not a man or women, a natural person or an individual unless the statute specifically defines ‘person’ and makes reference to men and women.

Black’s Law Dictionary 10^th Edition:

To confirm that ‘person’ in the Bills of Exchange Act does not include ‘men, women, natural persons and individuals’ see s. 188, which makes a clear distinction:

Bills of Exchange Act, 1985

Definitions
188 In this Part,
consumer purchase means a purchase, other than a cash purchase, of goods or services or an agreement to purchase goods or services
(a) by an individual other than for resale or for use in the course of his business, profession or calling, and
(b) from a person who is engaged in the business of selling or providing those goods or services;
goods means any article that is or may be the subject of trade or commerce, but does not include land or any interest therein;

purchaser means the individual by whom a consumer purchase is made;

seller means the person from whom a consumer purchase is made

Back to the Bills of Exchange Act, and our human signatures on commercial ‘instruments’ --

Bills of Exchange Act, 1985
Signature
4 Where, by this Act, any instrument or writing is required to be signed by any person, it is not necessary that he should sign it with his own hand, but it is sufficient if his signature is written thereon by some other person by or under his authority.
Bill of exchange
16 (1) A bill of exchange is an unconditional order in writing, addressed by one person to another, signed by the person giving it, requiring the person to whom it is addressed to pay, on demand or at a fixed or determinable future time, a sum certain in money to or to the order of a specified person or to bearer.
Non-compliance with requisites
(2) An instrument that does not comply with the requirements of subsection (1), or that orders any act to be done in addition to the payment of money, is not, except as hereinafter provided, a bill.
Accommodation bill
54 (1) An accommodation party to a bill is a person who has signed a bill as drawer, acceptor or endorser, without receiving value therefor, and for the purpose of lending his name to some other person.
Liability of party
(2) An accommodation party is liable on a bill to a holder for value, and it is immaterial whether, when that holder took the bill, he knew that party to be an accommodation party or not.

We asked Law Insider (AI) if the UCC-3 and the Bill of Exchange Act, protect the ‘accommodation party’ from liability by signing in the manner suggested in the video.

The Personal Property Security Act refers to each of the statutes passed by the common law provinces and territories of Canada. All Canadian provinces have adopted the Personal Property Security Act (PPSA) except for Quebec.
PPSA is for the most part, Canada’s equivalent to the UCC system, especially as regards to the UCC Article 9 (UCC-9). Each province has its own PPSA registry - Ontario has OnPPSA, Alberta has APPR (Alberta Personal Property Registry), BC has BCPPR, etc.
The basic concept of PPSA is the same as UCC Article (UCC-1) filings but the forms and requirements vary by province and the filing requirements get very tricky so that most people need a lawyer (of course).

According to Law Insider:

There isn’t a direct PPSA equivalent to UCC Article 3. UCC-3 governs negotiable instruments (notes, drafts, checks) as instruments of payment, including concepts like negotiability, holders in due course, presentment, dishonor, and enforcement of instruments.
The Canadian PPSAs primarily govern security interests in personal property and do not set the substantive rules for negotiability or enforcement of payment obligations. The Bills of Exchange Act, 1985 does that.
Substantive negotiable instruments law in Canada is covered in the federal Bills of Exchange Act, 1985 (BEA) covers most of what UCC Article 3 covers—e.g., what constitutes a bill, note, indorsement, holder in due course, presentment, dishonor, etc.)
Secured transactions treatment: Provincial PPSAs treat “instruments” (including negotiable instruments and certain payment intangibles) as a type of collateral and set perfection, priority, and enforcement rules for security interests in them. So, PPSA ≈ UCC Article 9 (not Article 3) for secured lending aspects.
Deposit accounts and payment systems: Some issues that sit under UCC Article 4 in the U.S. are handled in Canada by a mix of provincial legislation, common law, clearing rules (Payments Canada), and the BEA.
Summary:
For negotiability, transfer, party status and representation, and enforcement of notes/drafts/checks: look to the federal Bills of Exchange Act.
For taking, perfecting, and prioritizing a security interest in an “instrument”: look to your provincial PPSA (e.g., Ontario PPSA, BC PPSA).

This is complicated territory, since many men and women have been advised to sign a specific way to ‘protect’ themselves from being made sureties for strawman/persons/fictitious legal entities created using our names.

One example is how we sign cheques on a line…we think it is simply a ‘line’, usually it has MP next to it. But in fact, grab a strong magnifying glass and take a long look at the microprint line. You may have to photocopy or take an image and just keep blowing it up before you can read precisely what it says. But you are not signing as you, the man or woman, you are signing as an agent, a fictitious legal entity.

So, we asked Law Insider an AI:

Question: Is it correct that UCC-3 tends to protect the Accommodation Party from liability, but in contrast, the Canadian Bills of Exchange Act (BEA) does not protect the Accommodation Party from liability for the strawman/persons/legal entities created using their name?

The answer:

You’re asking whether UCC Article 3 protects an accommodation party from liability, while Canada’s Bills of Exchange Act (BEA) does not.
Clear answer:
Both regimes recognize accommodation parties and impose liability on them according to the instrument they sign. Neither system gives a blanket “no liability” protection to accommodation parties.
UCC Article 3 provides targeted defenses and discharge rules that can limit an accommodation party’s liability in certain circumstances. The BEA is more formal and less protective in those respects, but it does recognize suretyship-style defenses in limited ways.
Key points of comparison:
UCC Article 3 (U.S.)
Liability exists: An accommodation party is liable in the capacity in which they sign (maker, indorser, etc.).
Suretyship defenses: Article 3 expressly preserves surety defenses. If the creditor impairs collateral, extends time, or modifies the principal obligation without the accommodation party’s consent, the accommodation party may be discharged to the extent of the loss (see UCC 3-605).
Knowledge requirement: Holder’s knowledge of accommodation status can matter for some defenses.
Contribution/recourse: An accommodation party who pays has a right of recourse against the accommodated party.

Bills of Exchange Act (Canada)

Liability exists: An accommodation party (surety) who signs is liable to a holder for value, and the holder need not prove consideration beyond value given for the bill/note.
Fewer codified surety defenses: The BEA does not mirror UCC 3-605’s detailed discharge regime. Traditional suretyship defenses may be available under common law/equity, but they are not as expressly codified in the BEA context.
Holder in due course: The BEA’s HDC doctrine can cut off many defenses; accommodation status alone does not protect against an HDC.
Recourse: An accommodation party who pays can generally recover from the accommodated party (indemnity).
Practical takeaway
It is not correct to say UCC Article 3 “protects” accommodation parties from liability while the BEA does not. Both impose liability; UCC Article 3 more clearly articulates discharge protections when the creditor alters the risk without consent. Canadian law is less explicit in the statute, so you rely more on common law surety principles and careful drafting.
For Canadian deals, consider adding express suretyship protections in the instrument or ancillary agreement: consent requirements for extensions/modifications, waiver language, impairment-of-collateral rules, and clear indemnity in favor of the accommodation party.

We asked Law Insider to draft a short rider clause that preserves surety defenses for an Accommodation indorser under Canadian law. Following is what we got, but it is not short.

Disclaimer: we have no knowledge as to whether this surety defense is accurate, but you can take it to a lawyer to confirm should you feel the need to attach it to a negotiable instrument, such as your cheque where you put your human signature on a microprint line that indicates your are signing as agent.

Accommodation Indorser Rider (Canadian Law)
1. Status; Consideration. The undersigned (the Accommodation Indorser) signs this instrument solely as an accommodation party for the benefit of [ACCOMMODATED PARTY NAME], and not for the Accommodation Indorser’s own direct benefit. The holder acknowledges that the Accommodation Indorser’s liability, if any, is secondary and in the nature of suretyship.
2. Preservation of Suretyship Defenses. To the fullest extent permitted by applicable law (including the Bills of Exchange Act (Canada) and any applicable provincial law), the Accommodation Indorser retains all defenses, discharges, and rights available to a surety or guarantor (the Suretyship Defenses), including discharge or reduction of liability to the extent of any: (a) alteration or amendment of this instrument or the underlying obligation; (b) extension, renewal, indulgence, forbearance, waiver of defaults, or release; (c) release, substitution, loss, or impairment of any collateral or security; or (d) failure to give required notices—if any such action occurs without the prior written consent of the Accommodation Indorser.
3. No Enlargement of Risk Without Consent. The holder will not, without the Accommodation Indorser’s prior written consent, (a) increase the principal, interest rate, fees, or other material obligations; (b) extend the maturity or time for payment; (c) release or compromise claims against the maker/acceptor or any other party; or (d) release, subordinate, or impair collateral. Any action taken in breach of this Section 3 will discharge the Accommodation Indorser to the extent of the resulting prejudice.
4. Reservation of Rights Against Others. No delay, omission, or failure by the holder to exercise any right against the maker/acceptor or any other party will waive or prejudice the Accommodation Indorser’s Suretyship Defenses, and any indulgence granted to others will not enlarge the Accommodation Indorser’s obligations.
5. Reimbursement; Subrogation; Contribution. If the Accommodation Indorser pays any amount on this instrument: (a) the Accommodation Indorser is subrogated to the holder’s rights against the maker/acceptor and any collateral to the extent of such payment; (b) the maker/acceptor will promptly reimburse and indemnify the Accommodation Indorser for all amounts paid, plus reasonable costs and expenses (including legal fees on a substantial indemnity basis); and (c) the Accommodation Indorser retains all rights of contribution from any co‑accommodation parties.
6. Non‑Waiver; Written Waivers Only. The Accommodation Indorser does not waive any Suretyship Defenses except by an express written waiver that specifically references this Rider and is signed by the Accommodation Indorser. Any waiver by the holder of rights against others will not constitute a waiver of the Accommodation Indorser’s rights under this Rider.
7. Holder in Due Course; Notice. This Rider is intended to bind any holder who takes with actual knowledge (or notice apparent on the face of this instrument) that the undersigned is an accommodation indorser. The parties acknowledge that nothing in this Rider limits the rights of a holder in due course under the Bills of Exchange Act (Canada) who takes without such knowledge; provided that as between the original parties and any transferee with such knowledge, this Rider will be effective.
8. Governing Law; Conflicts. This Rider will be governed by and construed in accordance with the laws of the Province of [PROVINCE] and the federal laws of Canada applicable therein. To the extent of any conflict between this Rider and the body of the instrument, this Rider will prevail as between the signatories hereto.
9. Acknowledgement. The holder and the maker/acceptor acknowledge receipt of this Rider and agree that they will not take action inconsistent with its terms.
Notes for use:
· Insert this as an attached rider to the note or bill, and have the holder and maker/acceptor acknowledge it.
· Section 7 is calibrated to respect Bills of Exchange Act holder-in-due-course rules while preserving defenses against parties with knowledge.

The point of this tangent discussion on the signing of instruments with your given name, while acting as an agent for the strawman name created for you to take responsibility for, is that many gurus out there have been teaching people about the microprint trick and claim that signing with specific wording before or after the signature provides certain immunity from liability – clearly from above you understand that this claim is not valid in all circumstances.

Would it not be easier and more honourable for the government(s) to simply make the theft of the given name to create a legal entity/trade name illegal? This way all men and women would know exactly who they are binding when they sign an instrument.

Name Theft and Enslavement are Crimes in Law

Realize the magnitude of the enslaving situation we are all in. The good news is that “WE”, the Canadian slaves, are learning very quickly about the ins and outs, rights and wrongs of their fictitious and fraudulent legislation that serves the profiteering goals of their respective employers (corporations).

Many Canadians -- still stuck in the notion that democracy comes in the form of a corporate government such as CANADA, Inc and PROVINCE OF ONTARIO (Inc.) -- think there is a way that one can bring criminal charges against the lawyer-politicians creating and controlling this Canadian enslavement system. Most believe that criminal charges could be prosecuted by the system’s lawyers, using the trick language called ‘legalese’, in a building (court) owned by the corporation using the corporation’s ‘code’ (criminal code). They have never noticed that not a single Judge, lawyer, politician, Prime Minister or insider has ever spent time inside a prison for the harm they have done, let alone for the wealth they have stolen from us. We know of no instance where the politicians and other insiders have been forced to make restitution to the harmed.

Criminal Code of Canada

Extortion
346 (1) Every one commits extortion who, without reasonable justification or excuse and with intent to obtain anything, by threats, accusations, menaces or violence induces or attempts to induce any person, whether or not he is the person threatened, accused or menaced or to whom violence is shown, to do anything or cause anything to be done.

While the mother and or father is rivetted in jubilation of having a newborn, in the hospital they are coerced into signing the birth registration application for their newborn, unwittingly committing their new child to the very enslaving system explained on this page. The parents are NEVER informed of the legal implications of applying for a birth certificate, being that (a) the banks get control of the minor’s patrimony and (b) the child is forever a corporate asset and slave.

More recently, parents are sent the VOLUNTARY Social Insurance Program Application at the same time as the Birth Certificate application. The SIN program is strictly voluntary (use a magnifying glass to read the fine print above where you sign), but the child is unwittingly locked in at birth.

It is illegal to use the legal person/fictitious legal entity; see here why.

As you can see, the faster they can get us into a digital ID system, the more quickly they can bury ALL evidence of what they are doing into layers of ‘digits’.

If the mother and/or father were/are aware of this process and choose NOT to sign the applications, the child would become sovereign to the land immediately and could enter a lifetime of protection outside of the perceived confines of the manufactured corporate legalese. As you saw in Part 5, many parents are awake and will not register their newborns, which means the child is not a ‘legal person’, aka corporate slave, owned by a corporation.

Criminal Code of Canada
Identity Theft
402.2 (1) Every person commits an offence who obtains or possesses another person’s identity information with intent to use it to commit an indictable offence that includes fraud, deceit or falsehood as an element of the offence.
Trafficking in identity information
(2) Everyone commits an offence who transmits, makes available, distributes, sells or offers for sale another person’s identity information, or has it in their possession for any of those purposes, knowing that or being reckless as to whether the information will be used to commit an indictable offence that includes fraud, deceit or falsehood as an element of the offence.

The moment the birth certificate registration application is signed, the newborn’s identity as a human being has been stolen, then swiftly converted into a commercial instrument with a corporate registration number by the private corporation known as the Canadian Bank Note Company, creating a security and then traded on the stock and bond markets. This meets the definitions of Identity Theft and Trafficking in Identity Information.

Securities are legal financial instruments that are traded on the stock and bond markets by corporations, just as they trade ‘stock’ certificates, ‘bond’ certificates and ‘birth’ certificates. Usually these are buried in Mutual Funds.

Every individual involved in processing that application is complicit in this very crime of identity theft, including but not limited to the doctors, the hospital, Vital Statistics staff of every Province, the Registrar General, and the Bank Note Company of Canada (a private corporation).

The baby cannot consent to being transferred to the ownership of a corporation, anymore than his/her parents consented to being incorporated into a municipal corporation. Parents do not realize they are being coerced and tricked into transferring the baby and its given name and status as a human being and beneficiary, to commercial interests.

Note that in ALL corporate legislation they are talking about paper, not substance. Everything is always about a paper, a document, a law, a policy, but not about a living thing. The Birth Certificate is a document about a legal entity, the substance of the living being having been converted to a legal entity on paper. Thus the Birth Certificate is a form of ‘paperwork’ birth without the human labour and that is why the Province of Ontario provides names on the Birth Certificate of the registrar and deputy registrar in place of the original parents. When creating the paperwork birth certificate, the government did not create you the human, it did not ‘issue’ you as a child of the state. It gave birth to a legal person in paperwork.

Human Trafficking

Every piece of government identification that any individual is forced to apply for, including the social insurance number, has a registration number that is attached to a CUSIP number.

As we explained above, the CUSIP Number is mandatory for all financial securities that are traded on the global securities exchanges and stock market platforms, making big profits for corporations trafficking in legal entities (instruments) that human beings were tricked into being responsible for. The conversion of the human given name and status into a legal ‘person’ is a crime. So is using the result of that crime for commercial purposes a crime.
Sadly, it is the criminals who make the false laws that make the scheme possible.

Theft

Criminal Code of Canada
322 (1) Every one commits theft who fraudulently and without colour of right takes, or fraudulently and without colour of right converts to his use or to the use of another person, anything, whether animate or inanimate, with intent
(a) to deprive, temporarily or absolutely, the owner of it, or a person who has a special property or interest in it, of the thing or of his property or interest in it;
(b) to pledge it or deposit it as security;
(c) to part with it under a condition with respect to its return that the person who parts with it may be unable to perform; or
(d) to deal with it in such a manner that it cannot be restored in the condition in which it was at the time it was taken or converted.
Time when theft completed
(2) A person commits theft when, with intent to steal anything, he moves it or causes it to move or to be moved, or begins to cause it to become movable.
Secrecy
(3) A taking or conversion of anything may be fraudulent notwithstanding that it is effected without secrecy or attempt at concealment.
Purpose of taking
(4) For the purposes of this Act, the question whether anything that is converted is taken for the purpose of conversion, or whether it is, at the time it is converted, in the lawful possession of the person who converts it is not material.

The Criminal Code is self-explanatory. Theft by conversion, having taken a newborn’s human identity and human name (its personal property), then converting it to a commercial instrument with a registration number (a security number), and trading it on global exchanges for profit is a major crime and slavery.

WHY CAN’T WE BRING CRIMINAL CHARGES? Because the criminals doing this wrote the Criminal Code of Canada and own the Courts and the Judges, all of which are so criminal and corrupt they have no redeeming value to humans and society.

If we want a future for our future generations, perhaps WE should share this information with expectant mothers and fathers to NOT register their babies. It is never too late to make the ‘next’ generation sovereign – free to live as men and women on the land instead of in the shadows of the government corporations (deep state).

As well, WE all need to dismantle our corporate governments and install a proper Constitutional Republic, where the Constitution of every sovereign nation-state (formerly Canadian Province) prohibits such conversion and human trafficking and prioritizes individual human rights. See our future SOLUTIONS Series release to learn how this is not only possible, but the obligation of all Canadians to do in their former provinces.

Also, please let us know if any of our hyperlinks have stopped working so that we can fix them. Thank you.

People-United
people-united.ca

Subscribe now

Tip via Kofi/Stripe

E-transfer tips within Canada:
ADMIN-PU@proton.me

Series #2 NAME THEFT Part 5 -- What Owns You Lock, Stock and Barrel?

People-United Uncensored — Thu, 06 Aug 2026 12:02:11 GMT

You are born -- your parents or the delivering individual (nurse, mid-wife, doctor), complete the detailed Statement of Live Birth as an informant. See here. At this point, you are still regarded as a human being.

The Statement of Live Birth IS NOT a certificate, it is simply a record, a statement of fact, the documentation of a vital event. Your birth must be recorded and that record preserved. Prior to 1931, the details of vital events, such as births, deaths, marriages, divorces, etc were documented in the special space provided at the back of the family Bible. In some communities this is still the case.
A Certificate, on the other hand, is a written assurance, or official representation, that some act has or has not been done, or some event occurred, or some legal formality been complied with – being born is not a legal formality. The registration and then the assigning of a registration and certificate number is a legal formality.
The Statement of Live Birth is submitted to the corporate provincial Minister of Natural Resources, Department of Vital Statistics (note you are a ‘resource’, not a human being in that corporate ministry). This is a document that is under the control of the Registrar of Vital Statistics in each respective province.

Vital Statistics is a department of the corporate provincial government (in this case Ontario, where corporate Ontario is listed on the Securities Exchange Commission and headquartered in Toronto, Ontario. See the list here).
The Statement of Live Birth is recorded with the Registrar of Vital Statistics forever, (as are all other documents including certificates that apply to you over your lifetime, such as a marriage certificate and a death certificate).
The Statement of Live Birth has all sorts of important information about you, including the name you were given at birth, where and when you were born, and who your parents are. All this data is collated into a number of databases which are accessed by many agencies, corporations and individuals. In other words, this private data is sold.
The corporate province is very clever - when people ask for a certified copy of their birth record (Statement of Live Birth), they are sent a certified copy of their birth registration instead, which was created by taking an excerpt of the Statement of Live Birth and placing it into a document encircled in the margin by the corporate stamps and letterhead, such as the Registrar General’s seal and signature.
This certified copy ensures you are never returned to human being status; you remain a holder of a document that identifies you as a corporate resource/slave by showing a birthed human was transitioned into a corporate commodity through ‘registration’.
Below is a typical certified copy of the birth registration after government staff altered the Statement of Live Birth record to transform it into a ‘legal document’.
Remember that in Part 1 we explained how the content in the ‘margin’ of any document is glossa and is of no import to the actual content of the record – the Statement of Live Birth. But due to our presumptions we believe that all that marginal notation somehow impacts our birth record, when it does not.
When they steal the birth record, they cannot just destroy it. So, they alter it in a way that converts it to a certificate knowing we would not understand the significance. In fact, most people do not know the difference between a recording and a registration, or between a record and a certificate. The content in the margins of our Statements of Live Birth are the evidence of their legal activity but we don’t know what they truly mean.
As people were starting to understand the role of marginal notations and glossa, the corporate government had to employ trick terminology. Now they refer to the Statement of Live Birth (a record) as the long-form Birth Certificate (a legal document) and the small Birth Certificate card as the short-form Birth Certificate. They have deliberately conflated a simple record, with a legally created certificate of commercial value.

IT IS IMPORTANT TO KNOW THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN RECORDING AND REGISTRATION, BECAUSE HUMANS RECORD EVENTS, CORPORATIONS ‘REGISTER’ THEIR LEGAL ENTITIES FOR VARIOUS COMMERCIAL EVENTS. See here FOR DETAILS.

The Department of Vital Statistics sent your parents a Birth Certificate Application but never told them that it will be sending the vital statistical information they provide on the form to a private for-profit, unaccountable corporation called The Canadian Bank Note Company (see here).
The Canadian Bank Note Company then converts your name (the child’s name given by the parent(s)) into a fictitious legal entity that will be given a CUSIP number, just like any other traded security. In past times the CUSIP was a series of red numbers on the back of the Birth Certificate, but now it is embedded in a Product Bar Code on the Birth Certificate.
NOTE: if you ask AI why a CUSIP number on regular financial documents has 9 digits, but the Birth Certificate has only 8 (usually a letter followed by 7 digits) in red styling on the back of the Birth Certificate card, it will tell you that it is a myth that birth certificates are used as commodities or in financial interactions and that the red number is not a CUSIP number but a SERIAL NUMBER. It will also tell you that the certificate has a registration number, a certificate number and a serial number for administrative tracking purposes only. It will also tell you that the Birth Certificate is essential for legal identity, but as you will learn when we provide you with the testimony of the Deputy Director of Vital Statistics, this is a falsehood. In fact AI will do everything it can to gaslight you, to convince you that the government narrative is reliable, etc.
But it will not answer why all these numbers are necessary when the Birth Record will do just fine if all they are collecting and selling is aggregated data to facilitate the provision of the (almost non-existent) healthcare and other services. Nor will it have an answer as to why Birth Certification and social insurance programs were started during the Great Depression when all corporations masquerading as governments went bankrupt and collateral was desperately needed to get loans from the World Bank/Rothschild banking system.
Nor would/could it explain why the given name was distorted. We expected AI to just claim it was because computers cannot style one’s name correctly, but it just ignored the subject.
So, is that RED number on the back of the Birth Certificate a CUSIP or a SERIAL NUMBER? This is where everyone must consider all information and decide for themselves if the government narrative parroted by AI and bureaucrats makes sense. Legally, certificates have value. So why would a complex registration/certification process be installed by a corporation (government) during a world-wide economic collapse, after which income taxation of men and women started in earnest and we became ruled by corporate statutes and almost 1 million regulations and requirements?

NOTE THE DISTORTION OF THE GIVEN NAME John Q Public TO THAT OF A LEGAL ENTITY, ‘PUBLIC, JOHN Q’.

NOW THE NEW ‘OWNERS’ ARE SHOWN BY THE STAMP LOCATED DEAD CENTRE OF THE CERTIFICATE AND THE SIGNATURES ON BOTH SIDES OF THE REGISTRAR AND DEPUTY REGISTRAR, SIGNIFYING THE OWNERSHP OF THAT CERTIFICATE.

Notice there is no sign of the parent’s existence.

This is what that little arrow is pointing to, seen only when the card is magnified:

In case you are wondering what the CUSIP # on your Birth Certificate is for:

The parents are never advised that the child, if he/she takes responsibility for this fictitious legal entity with a name that looks like theirs, will be indebted and enslaved to the corporation forever.

Parents are told that the child can never be a ‘person’ in law unless they submit an application for a Birth Certificate, but they are never told that ‘person’ removes you from the human being category of natural creation and puts you into a commercial/corporate system of fictitious legal entities (artificial things).

Even the corporate state-owned media is in on the enslavement, being that they are subsidiaries of the parent company (CANADA, Inc.).

Confirmation of our statements can be found by reading the testimony of Ontario Deputy Registrar of Vital Statistics, Judith Hartman, about how her office turns the Statement of Live Birth into Birth Certificates, as well as the Decision of the Human Rights Tribunal case she testified at cited as XY vs. Ontario (Government and Consumer Services), 2012 HRTO 726. This case was about birth certificate handling with respect to transgender names and gender identities, but applies to all handling of all birth documents.

In that case, it is clear that the government that has tried to force the public to accept ‘gender identity’ as a ‘right’ is not given any consideration in vital statistics. It is interesting that even though an individual is born ONCE, transgenders get a do-over, with a new ‘birth certificate’.

Part 1 of 2 of the transcript is here. Part 2 of 2 of the transcript is here.

Judith (Judi) Hartman runs the Ontario Vital Statistics office where births, deaths, marriages (life events) are records. She explains under oath, how your given name and RECORD of Live Birth is turned into a government certificate, after which it is fully available to ‘businesses’ downstream of the Registrar of Vital Statistics.

Pay close attention to the double speak and trick words in that testimony:

Not once was Hartman asked why it had to be a ‘certificate’ number, instead of just a case or record #, given that a ‘certificate’ in law is a security that can be and is usually monetized and traded as a commodity.
Ms. Hartman did not refer to men and women, but to ‘persons’ and ‘subjects’.
Ms. Hartman stated clearly that the Birth Certificate proves nothing...does not identify the individual associated to it, does not provide addresses. All the Birth Certificate does is provide data for many different government datasets having nothing to do with men and women. And DATA is a commodity, worth billions.
Not once did she refer to the parents as ‘stakeholders’ or why they are not fully informed about what applying for a birth certificate really means: their child’s given name and particulars (their private property) are being commoditized, complete with a certificate (security).
Note how they equate a live birth, with a transgender event. The transgender event was not a birth, but the transgender event is treated as the true birth event. The actual birth of the individual who later (long after birth) decided to become transgendered is erased and replaced by particulars of a later artificial transgender event. They do not deal with what happens if the transgendered decides the original birth and sex was correct all along and want it back? Most people understand that we are only born once…yet transgendered appear to be able to be born as often as they wish.
Why was she not asked why the name on the Birth Certificate is in all caps, with a comma, and a distorted version of the birth (given) name (Statement of Live Birth) if they are not interested in keeping track of humans in their datasets?
And why did the Statement of Live Birth record have to be transformed into a certificate or even a registered document…why could they not just continue to record and build data sets from the Statements of Live Birth? [Because our private information is used to create commodities with names that look like our human names.]

Notice that she states they don’t keep track of individual (human birth) names, but they give their certificates individual names. They DO NOT give the security certificates a human name -- they give the certificates a fictitious legal entity name that looks like the human name.
By using the term ‘individual’ the way we commonly speak so that she appears to be talking about each certificate getting a name, she hides that the certificate does not have an ‘individual’s’ name, but a fictitious legal entity’s name that looks like an individual’s name. Then you spend your entire life thinking that you are the government-issued name on the certificate security!

A truthful public servant would say that they ‘give each individual certificate a legal entity name’.
If you think that the Birth Certificate is not part of the corporation’s business and that they don’t collect your personal information to pass on to other businesses to do as they wish with the data, take a look at this from page 29 of the Hartman transcript:

Also, please let us know if any of our hyperlinks have stopped working so that we can fix them. Thank you.

People-United
people-united.ca

Subscribe now

Tip via Kofi/Stripe

E-transfer tips within Canada:
ADMIN-PU@proton.me

Series #2 NAME THEFT Part 4 Incorporating Men and Women Without Their Consent

People-United Uncensored — Sun, 02 Aug 2026 12:00:46 GMT

Living in the Private

Excerpted From: Living-in-the-Private (archived here):

NOTE that Living-in-the-Private is an excellent educational article and much of it applies to Canada as well, however, a great deal, such as about the application of the Uniform Commercial Code (UCC) applies only to the US, but Canadian provinces do have corresponding codes.

All Canadian provinces except Quebec which operates under the civil code and not common law, have modelled their Personal Property Security Act (PPSA) after the UCC. At this site, you can find the corresponding provisions between the UCC and PPSA (archived here) that govern commercial transactions between states and provinces.

EVERY natural man and woman is born “in the private”. A sovereign government of the people is a public institution, and therefore its Public Servants and its various artificial creations are “in the public”, including its artificial legal “persons”.

A man or woman can either “live” “in the private”, or “act” “in the public”.

Legal “actors” will attempt to engage the “person” by posting letters, by phone, or on the highway (through use of signs) to make and enforce a contract.

Misrepresenting a living man or woman as a fictional “person” causing unwitting “joinder” is the crime of “personage”, and it is perpetuated by “barratry”, the crime of bringing false claims in court. The term “barratry”, appropriately, comes from the “BAR association”. (Attempted “joinder” by any legal “person” actor is a ‘Crime involving deceit’, Section 240 of the New Zealand Crimes Act.)

Under the Common Law Jurisdiction (Law of the Land), both parties must enter into every contract knowingly, voluntarily, and intentionally, or the contract is unenforceable and void.

However, under the Admiralty Maritime Jurisdiction (Law of the Sea), consent to contract can be presumed by silent acquiescence, unless the party contracted thereby rebuts the presumption of consent.

If you do not wish to consent to their contract offer (presentment), you must REBUT THE PRESUMPTION that you are “acting” in the “role” of a fictional legal “person”. Otherwise, you are presumed to have consented by silent acquiescence.

Private: To be “in the private” is to “live” in a “private capacity” as a man or woman, with flesh and blood, arms and legs, a conscious mind, a spirit, and life. All men and women are created as equal sovereigns, endowed with unalienable rights, responsibilities, and credit (commercial energy). As natural men and women, they are Creditors. Their right to contract is unlimited, and they have unlimited liability. They are outside and above the State. From Latin privatus “set apart, belonging to oneself (not to the state)”.
Public: To be “in the public” is to “act” in a “public capacity” as an “accommodation party” in “joinder” to an “artificial person” created and governed by the State. All men and women who “act” in legal fiction “roles” for the State are granted conditional Privileges and Benefits prescribed in legislative “Acts”. As Artificial Persons, they are Debtors. Their right to contract is limited, and they have limited liability. They are inside and under the State. From Latin publicus “of the people; of the state; done for the state”.

Excerpted from: Living-in-the-Private (archived here):

What Is A “Person”?
In the imaginary world of legal fiction – and all commerce is legal fiction -- a “person” is always an artificial “legal person” of one kind or another, always legally generated.
“A legal person is any subject matter to which the law attributes a merely legal or fictitious personality. This extension … is one of the most noteworthy feats of the legal imagination! Legal persons, being the arbitrary creations of the law, may be of as many kinds as the law pleases. Those … recognised by our own system, however, all fall within a single class, namely, corporations or bodies corporate.”
Source: Jurisprudence 7th Edition, Sweet & Maxwell Ltd (1924), Section 113, p.336

What is a natural person? A human being, naturally born, versus a legally generated juridical person.

Black’s Law Dictionary, 2nd Edition

artificial person. A nonhuman entity that is created by law and is legally different owning its own rights and duties.

Black’s Law Dictionary, 2nd Edition

juridical person. Entity, as a firm, that is not a single natural person, as a human being, authorized by law with duties and rights, recognised as a legal authority having a distinct identity, a legal personality. Also known as artificial person, juridical entity, juristic person, or legal person. Also refer to body corporate.

Black’s Law Dictionary, 2nd Edition

natural person. A human being, as distinguished from an artificial person created by law.

Blacks Law Dictionary, 7th Edition

On the Birth Certificate, the legal person NAME is a deceased Estate Trust, which is why the definition for the term “person” in the United States.Inc Social Security Act 1935, includes “trustor estate”.

Social Security Act 1935
DEFINITIONS
SECTION 1101.
(a) When used in this Act-
(3) The term person means an individual, a trust or estate, a partnership, or a corporation.

The existence of two entities, the “legal person” and the “natural person” (the currently accepted legal terms for the artificial legal entity and the natural living entity) (archived here) is plainly acknowledged in the former Commonwealth country, New Zealand’s Bill of Rights Act 1990:

Section 29, Application to Legal Persons.
“Except where the provisions of this Bill of Rights otherwise provide, the provisions of this Bill of Rights apply, so far as practicable, for the benefit of all legal persons as well as for the benefit of all natural persons.”

Let’s take a look at the Canadian Bill of Rights, 1960 (archived here) which is very short.

Open the document up and you will see a reference to the human person, an individual, men. As it gets into ‘rights’ it refers only to ‘person’. Once they get into Section 2, Construction of Law, you then see a shift in terminology, indicating that the law is about the government dealing with ‘persons’, legal entities only.

It was clever to refer to humans in the preamble, then revert to referencing ‘persons’ (non-humans), when discussing the law.

When they drafted this document, not only was the federal Parliament nothing but a charade because of the Statute of Westminster, 1931 that made every province a sovereign nation, but the lawyers knew that ‘person’ referred to a corporation, association or other legal entity subject to statutes and corporate-made laws and not to humans.

Human person -- using their original legal definition of ‘person’ -- a human corporation, a human association or other human legal entity – all of which are oxymorons, since you are either a live man or woman, or a fictitious legal entity created in the mind of man.

These facts render the Canadian Bill of Rights a fraudulent document, intended to mislead Canadians into thinking it applies to men and women. They knew that most people would incorrectly assume that the term ‘person’ meant men and women!

Diminishment of Human Status by Corporations

As you can no doubt surmise, you can be very much reduced from the status of a live, sovereign man or woman, simply by the way an authority styles (writes) your name, or denotes your ‘status’.

Blacks Law Dictionary – Revised 4th Edition 1968

Definitions of written styles:

Capitis Diminutio (means the diminishing of status through the use of capitalization) In Roman law. A diminishing or abridgment of personality; a loss or curtailment of a man’s status or aggregate of legal attributes and qualifications.
Capitis Diminutio Minima (means a minimum loss of status through the use of capitalization, e.g. John Doe - The lowest or least comprehensive degree of loss of status. This occurred where a man’s family relations alone were changed. It happened upon the arrogation [pride] of a person who had been his own master (sui juris) [of his own right, not under any legal disability] or upon the emancipation of one who had been under the patria potestas [Parental authority]. It left the rights of liberty and citizenship unaltered. See Inst. 1, 16, pr.; 1, 2, 3; Dig. 4, 5, 11; Mackeld.Rom.Law, 144.
Capitis Diminutio Media (means a medium loss of status through the use of capitalization, e.g. John DOE - A lessor or medium loss of status. This occurred where a man loses his rights of citizenship, but without losing his liberty. It carried away also the family rights.
Capitis Diminutio Maxima (means a maximum loss of status through the use of capitalization, e.g. JOHN DOE or DOE, JOHN) - The highest or most comprehensive loss of status. This occurred when a man’s condition was changed from one of freedom to one of bondage, when he became a slave. It swept away with it all rights of citizenship and all family rights.

Note the types of “persons” evidenced by the following styles:

John Henry Doe = Foreign Situs Trust
JOHN HENRY DOE = Cestui Que Vie ESTATE Trust
JOHN H. DOE = Public Transmitting Utility

See the video ‘What is Person’ (archived here).

New Zealand is a former Commonwealth country just as are Australia and Canada and the basis for their laws are the same. It is interesting to see how they acknowledge the living man and woman as separate from the commercial legal entity.

Distorted names are fictitious legal entities! They are not YOU!

When your given name is stolen and then distorted to make someone else money, it’s very much like credit card theft. It is property and identity theft. Broadly speaking, this theft is no different than what any credit card hacker does. They impersonate you to gain access to your assets and credit.

FACTS:

A non-living thing, such as a corporation, cannot contract with a living thing such as a man or woman.

A non-living corporation, created in the mind of man, can contract with another non-living thing such as a corporation that is also created in the mind of man.

A living human being can contract with another living human being.

A non-living thing such as corporation can trick the living being into accepting responsibility for a non-living thing by simply creating a non-living legal entity that has a name that LOOKS LIKE the living being’s name.
THAT’S LEGALESE AND THE JUSTINIAN DECEPTION

Watch a short but easily understood explanation of how trick words operate to enslave you and how the term ‘person’ is a legal term used to move you from human being to ‘legal entity’ (strawman) status, here.

In 1913, Colonel Wendall Mandel House predicted to the then US President Woodrow Wilson that corporations would enslave the People using strawman entities and that the social, financial and legal systems were DELIBERATELY designed to enslave humanity.

Yet, many Canadian Judges will ridicule a self-represented litigant who brings up ‘strawman’ status. Lawyers know better than to mention ‘strawman’ in court.

In law, he who creates, owns. Once a legal entity (also known as a strawman) is created to trick the human being into incorporating with the corporation, such as when a municipal corporation incorporates the human inhabitants into its corporation, it can then rule over its legal entities.

Municipal Act, 2001 (Ontario)
“municipality” means a geographic area whose inhabitants are incorporated;
“person” includes a municipality unless the context otherwise requires;

[Remember: ‘includes’ and ‘including’ in law limit the meaning to what follows these terms. When you see ‘includes’ or ‘including’ train yourself to think ‘means’. Thus ‘person’ above means a municipality.

In other words, by distorting your name (stealing your given name and changing it just enough to trick you), then ‘incorporating’ the distorted name into their corporation, they have created a ‘corporation sole’, which means, a single corporation within their corporation. You, however, presume that the distorted name is you and that the commercial ‘class’ of subjects they call ‘inhabitants’ includes you, the man or woman.

To give you another example of what a ‘corporation sole’ is, the Governor General of Canada is a Corporation Sole that does the dirty work for the Queen’s company, the CROWN. The Queen/Kings are corporation soles administering for-profit corporations, such as Government of Canada.

All legislation is extortion and corporate revenue generation. All of it is written in legalese, which we mistaken to be English. Legislation also provides immunity for pretty much all wrong-doing using terms such as ‘acting in good faith’. The term ‘acting in good faith’ is never defined and is at the discretion of a corrupt corporate Judge.

You are a ‘security’ in our corporate world

All securities and commodities in commerce are regulated by the Canadian Ownership and Determination Act, seen here, which is a federal statute that allows corporations to determine who owns what.

Since YOU the human being unwittingly agree to be a legal entity (also known as a corporate body) when you accept responsibility for the fictitious legal entity whose name looks similar to yours but distorted, YOU are owned and what owns you is determined by this Act.

Let’s take a look at this 1985 Act more closely, and we draw your attention to important words in red. Take note that just after the installation of the 1982 Charter of Rights and Freedoms that purported to recognize human beings, we have a piece of legislation that allows them to continue enslavement by birth certificate, even though slavery, in all its forms, is purportedly prohibited:

Canadian Ownership and Control Determination Act, R.S.C., 1985, c. C-20

certificate means a certificate issued by the Minister under this Act;
control status means, with respect to a person, whether or not the person is Canadian controlled as determined under this Act and the regulations;
direct equity percentage means, with respect to formal equity owned by a person in any particular person,
(a) where the particular person does not have more than one class of formal equity within the meaning of the regulations, the percentage of the formal equity of the particular person that is owned by the person, and
(b) where the particular person has more than one class of formal equity within the meaning of the regulations, subject to the regulations, the aggregate fair market value of the formal equity of the particular person that is owned by the person, expressed as a percentage of the aggregate fair market value of all the formal equity of the particular person;)
formal equity means,
(a) with respect to a corporation, any share of the corporation, other than a share excluded by the regulations, that is, or is deemed under the regulations to be, issued and outstanding,
(b) with respect to a partnership, any interest or right in the capital or income, or both, of the partnership,
(c) with respect to a trust, any beneficial interest in the property of the trust, and
(d) with respect to any other person, such interest or right in respect of that person as is prescribed;
informal equity means, subject to the regulations, any interest or right to participate in or benefit from, either currently or in the future, other than by way of formal equity, the assets, revenues or business activities of another person;
investor means, with respect to an applicant for a certificate, a person who has a total equity percentage in the applicant that is greater than zero;
Minister means the Minister of Natural Resources;
owned means, subject to the regulations, beneficially owned, and the words owner and ownership have corresponding meanings;
person means an individual, a corporation, a partnership, a trust, a government, an agency of government, a segregated fund within the meaning of the regulations and an organization that is prescribed as being a person or that falls into a class of organizations prescribed as being persons;
Who may apply (for a certificate of ownership)
4 The following are qualified to apply for a certificate:
(a) an individual other than a non-eligible person;
(b) a corporation incorporated in Canada;
(c) a partnership, if the relationship among the partners as such is governed by the laws of a province;
(d) a trustee in respect of a trust, if the trustee and beneficiaries are, with respect to their status as such, governed by the laws of a province;
(e) an insurance company incorporated in Canada in respect of any of its segregated funds within the meaning of the regulations; and
(f) any person prescribed as being qualified to apply for a certificate or who falls into a class of persons prescribed as being qualified to apply for a certificate.

So, this act allows for the trafficking in individuals – to be owned.

Also, please let us know if any of our hyperlinks have stopped working so that we can fix them. Thank you.

People-United
people-united.ca

Subscribe now

Tip via Kofi/Stripe

E-transfer tips within Canada:
ADMIN-PU@proton.me

Series #2 NAME THEFT – Part 3 Are You a Man, Woman or Person?

People-United Uncensored — Thu, 30 Jul 2026 12:02:25 GMT

ESSENTIAL: LOOK AT THE SUMMARY DEFINITIONS OF LAWFUL AND LEGAL provided here.

It is also important to understand what is meant by ‘constructive’, such as constructive fraud, constructive theft:

Another example of ‘constructive’:

It is the TASK of ALL LAWYERS to ensure we never learn of their specialized language and how we have been deceived and turned into legal fictions. It is their task to ensure we never understand how we have been constructively brought into a trust situation with wealthy elite, how they constructively steal everything we have using one piece of commercial legislation after the next.

When we register SOMETHING/ANYTHING, including our children, vehicles, homes and land, WE ARE GIVING UP OWNERSHIP (possession) to the corporation we are registering that thing with, and receiving a certificate of title (commercial receipt) that is worthless to humans. We are allowed the use of that thing so long as the registrar (the corporation or society we registered with) agrees to let us use it.
Problem is that we PRESUME we still own them.

The corporate commercial system ensures that we never learn that they are speaking a totally separate language (legalese) that even has its own specialized dictionary. The law dictionary has definitions that are opposite to what we see in regular English Dictionaries or what we commonly understand words, such as ‘PERSON’ to mean.

It’s a trick language and you need to review our CRIMINAL LANGUAGE series to truly understand that what you presume are normal actions, such as when you register your vehicle, your children for school, register for social insurance number in their voluntary social insurance program, register for the birth certificate, register your child for hockey, and so on, you are enslaving yourself to the corporation you register with EVERY SINGLE TIME you do so.

Please listen to this 15-minute explanation of ‘Are you a man, woman or PERSON?’ about how this legalese process works and you will also understand why the corporate Governments in Canada at all levels ended the ‘recording’ of events and force us to ‘register’ everything. The video refers to the UK corporation, but Canada is set up exactly the same way, using the same legalese, etc.

Canada’s system is rooted in the UK system, and the corporation disguised as our common law government is called CANADA, INC and other such corporate names. Here are some institutions listed as for-profit corporations on Dun & Bradstreet (note some are screen shots from the 600 million business database and others are compilations of excerpts from many searches in that database for illustrative purposes – all of which you can confirm by doing your own research on the Dun & Bradstreet website:

For readers who are interested in more proof that CANADA is a company that does business out of Washington, District of Columbia (DC) -- which is a sovereign City-state (not part of the United States) and is part of a three City-state empire (i.e., Washington, D.C., City of London, and Vatican City) ruled by the Church of Rome -- review all the CANADA company and its corporate filing documents in the Securities Exchange Commission EDGAR database (it’s free).

From WHY-YOU-ARE-DEAD (in corporate law, even if you aren’t in real life) (archived here):

“In law, a DEAD man has no rights. While you are dead, the administrator-trustee, has total control over your estate, (Birthright ownership over the mineral and energy wealth of the country you were born on) because you are assumed dead... If you were assumed legally dead at such a young age and you never returned back to your true correct birthright legal standing without making a will or an agreement of compensation in order to enter into their fraud, (Because you were too young to know and you were never told), your whole life as an assumed legally dead “person” will be under the total control of the person that perpetrated the fraud against you in the first place.
If the registrar general of your birth certificate is a banker of the foreign private Rothschild’s banking system, than that is your master within their legally dead world, you left your real Christ.
The world of Mamon and usury [interest on loans] is the underworld of the legally dead and if your equity dies (Your real body) while you remain in their system of the legally dead, so does your true God given rights that was only given to the living, die along with it.
To let go of the underworld gutter of Mamon is to reclaim your “life” but too many people love the life of the underworld-mamon too much to ever let go of the legal titles of the world of the legally dead... Once you let go of the legal title, the equity returns on the condition you know who you “really” are, as in your real name, your real date of birth and your real number in registry... Being “BIRTHED” into the underworld is being birthed into legal death.”

~Justinian Deception

When, as an adult, you take all the steps necessary to establish your Claim of Right to your name and status as a living human being, the corporate municipalities will ignore you and when you stand on your declared status in court, they will also ignore you or silence you through obscene cost awards-- this is because they are seated as commercial legal entity actors and not in a role of live human being adjudicating a live human issue. Soon enough if you persist, they will harass you in endless ways you never dreamt possible.

The Municipal Act, 2001 (Ontario) has been revised 88 times since 2004 and each time, the appropriation of private property for any reason a municipal corporation can conjure up is made ‘law’. A property owner is no longer permitted to leave their rental units vacant (particularly in a single-family-home), else they will be taxed for the vacancy!

Municipal Act, 2001 (Ontario)
Municipality
(2) In this Act, a reference to a municipality is a reference to its geographical area or to the municipal corporation, as the context requires.
Taxes of a municipality
(6) In this Act, except in Part IX.1 (Optional Tax on Vacant Residential Units), a reference to a tax of a municipality or any other expression meaning a tax of a municipality does not include a tax imposed under Part IX.1, unless the context requires otherwise.
Body corporate
4 The inhabitants of every municipality are incorporated as a body corporate.

See our Series #1 MUNICIPAL FRAUD starting here, and Series #2 PROPERTY THEFT starting here, to learn more about how you are nothing more than an incorporated human being at the mercy of for-profit municipal corporations given the legal (but not lawful) power to extort you under one pretext or another.

Most people want to get ‘free’, but that is impossible to do until one understands how we are tricked into chaining ourselves to corrupt societies and corporations.

Real Life Consequences of Corporations Distorting Your Birth Name

Let’s see how the distortion of your given name by corporations affects you your entire life --

Let’s pretend that a child is born and her parents, John and Jane Smith, name her Mary Jean.

Mary Jean is her given name at birth, also known as her ‘birth’ name. This is her personal, private property forever. She is an individual.

She was born into the Smith family, so her family name or surname is Smith. This name is shared by the family collective.

Her name as a human being is Mary Jean the individual of the Smith family collective, but custom has shortened this to Mary Jean Smith.

Again: The name Mary Jean is private property. Smith is collective property – every one of that family collective can use the property (the name Smith). This is because a single individual owns the personal name, but a whole raft of Mary Jean’s relatives can use the Smith family name.

The Rules for styling a personal name are found in the Styles Manual of every country that trades with other countries. A Styles Manual is the bible on the language’s grammar rules. To trade with other countries, every trading partner must have a recognized flag, a Styles Manual and a Post Office. These are the requirements for engagement in international commerce.

We discussed the Chicago Manual of Style (CMoS) earlier in Part 1 when we showed how lawyers and writers of government and court documents are bound by rules of grammar. The CMoS is the most widely styles manual in the world.

The Oxford Styles Manual is used by the British and was used by Canada until 1982 when Canada became ‘bilingual’. A new Styles Manual was created for Canada called The Canadian Style. It is a 400-page document, available only on-line and subject to additions and changes as bilingual terms are decided upon. They stopped publishing it in hard-copy around 1992.

The Americans, for another example, typically rely on the Chicago Styles Manual (or CMoS).

If the government has not yet removed it from public viewing, The Canadian Styles Manual is found by clicking here. It is a very large document, covering every situation regarding grammar and styling of official documents.

See The Canadian Styles 1997 writing guide, 316 pages, provided here, if the link above is broken.

The Canadian Styles Manual is very specific about how all legislation, government communication (on and off the Internet) is to be presented in terms of grammar and styling, such as capitalization. These are not a matter of opinion, but of government regulation and policy that are referenced by any nation doing business with Canada.

Here is an excerpt from the Canadian Styles Manual (CSM) – it is Chapter 4 on CAPITALIZATION.

This Chapter outlines how YOU the human being, are to have YOUR name styled in all written communication. We preserved Chapter 4 of the 400-page Canadian Styles Manual on CAPITALIZATION: Personal names NOTE how personal names of individual human beings are not reversed, all capitalized or corrupted with commas:

4.03 Personal names
(a) Capitalize proper nouns and epithets that accompany or replace them:
John Diefenbaker
Margaret Thatcher
Peter the Great
the Sun King
(b) When O’ forms part of a proper noun, it and the first letter after the apostrophe are capitalized:
O’Brien
O’Malley
(c) When the particle Mc or Mac forms part of a name, the letter M is capitalized. Capitalization and spacing of the letters that follow may differ and individual preferences should be respected:
McDonald or MacDonald or Mac Donald or Macdonald
(d) Individual preferences regarding the capitalization and spacing of articles and particles in French or foreign names should also be respected when they can be ascertained.¹ The following are correct forms:
Walter de la Mare
Ethel Vandenberg
John Dos Passos
Cornelius Van Horne
Pierre de Savoye
Paul DeVillers
(e) In the case of historical figures, treatment in English may differ from that in the original language, and no real standard appears to exist. Consistency in treating a particular name (such as Leonardo da Vinci, Luca della Robbia or Vincent van Gogh) is all that can be aimed for. In some cases, the most familiar form of the name omits the particle entirely:
Beethoven (Ludwig van Beethoven)
Torquemada (Tomás de Torquemada)
(f) Capitalize a nickname (a word or phrase used as part of, or instead of, a personal name):
the Chief
the Rocket
the Iron Lady
Similarly, capitalize names of fictitious or anonymous persons, and names used as personifications:
Johnny Canuck
Paul Bunyan
the Caped Crusader
John Bull

Given the low literacy skills of Canadians, you would think that an ethical government would ensure that it made available all possible writing tools that could help Canadians write correctly, but no, here is a recent notice that it will be removing the writing portal in January 2021:

Resources of the Language Portal of Canada Access free tools to improve your knowledge of English and French. Polish your writing skills with our quizzes, participate in the Our Languages blog, and explore a selection of language-related Canadian links.
Important notice
Good news! We have updated our writing tools. The Canadian Style and Writing Tips have been combined to create a new tool called Writing Tips Plus.
Don’t forget to update your bookmarks. The Canadian Style will be removed from the Language Portal of Canada in early 2021.

Most Canadians have never heard of the Canadian Styles Manual! Schools certainly don’t teach about it.

This is a very important tool because it helps Canadians recognize when fraudulent language is being used in contracts that are prepared by banks, financial agencies, the government and all sorts of corporations. As we mentioned before, the governments of CANADA and of every province, are for-profit corporations, listed on the Securities Exchange Commission seen here, and business databases such as Dun & Bradstreet, discussed earlier. CANADA, Inc is headquartered in Washington, DC. As we showed earlier, the government and every institution, agency and society is a for-profit company.

The corporation masquerading as government needs the Canadian public to be as ignorant as possible, since it is difficult to keep well informed slaves enslaved for very long.

Despite how time-consuming it was, People-United have preserved the entire ‘The Canadian Style’ for the People of Canada, especially since it provides evidence that corporations used fraudulent language in contracts when the contract is compared to the government’s own rules for grammar.

[Side note: The cost of accessing the amount of evidence needed to inform the masses is substantial and the reason we ask readers to make whatever donation they can to help us fund our continuing research.]

Since the UN took control of Canada in 1985 (see our UN INVASION series, Part 4), it has undermined and replaced just about all domestic customs and laws. It appears that the UN is removing those tools Canadians need to be grammatically correct in their written materials – see the UN promotion of the United Nations Editorial Manual Online seen here (archived here).

According to the UN’s website, (archived here) ”the online Oxford Dictionary in British English is the current authority for spelling in the United Nations. If more than one spelling is given in the dictionary, use the form listed first unless otherwise indicated below. The Concise Oxford English Dictionary, twelfth edition, is an acceptable alternative.”

We discuss in detail the law and court decisions regarding given names versus legal names in the next section titled ‘Why is changing our names without our consent, illegal?’

Not a single personal name (personal pronoun) is to be all capitalized in proper English. Going back to our example above, the Manual requires the child’s name to be styled as

Mary Jean Smith

Yet, look at your birth certificate, and most every document you ever get, such as utility bills and tax notices: the name is styled similar to these examples:

SMITH, MARY, JEAN or SMITH, MARY J. or MARY,JEAN,SMITH or SMITH, M. or a whole host of other distortions, all without your consent.

We remind you that it is very unlikely that your parents named you comma (,).

In the last 10 years, the corporations running Canada have erased our human identities altogether and converted our birth names into digits as Digital IDs controlled by computers that are in turn controlled by Artificial Intelligence.

As we discuss later under ‘Why is changing our names without our consent illegal?’ pursuant to the Change of Name Act, RSO 1990, c C.7 (archived here), this is an illegal act and these corporations, and particularly corporate governments, know this all too well. When some informed sovereigns tried to correct the styling of their names, they were met with gaslighting, an excuse that the computer will not let them do otherwise, and retaliation.

Note the absurdity: A computer will be implanted into your brain if you agree to the COVID vaccine (see COVID/PCR FRAUD series), yet they claim that the computer cannot style your name correctly and in accordance with the government’s own Styles Manual.

Please see our Series #2 PROPERTY THEFT starting here to become completely knowledgeable about when you are being deceived into giving up your status as a human as well as your personal property (cars, land, children, pension, etc).

Also, please see our CRIMINAL LANGUAGE series to understand that they are actually always speaking to you in a babble that is not found in either English or LATIN, but your educational institution tricked you into accepting this fictitious DOG-latin language to your detriment everywhere you go…government offices, corporations, courts, police station and so on.

Also, please let us know if any of our hyperlinks have stopped working so that we can fix them. Thank you.

People-United
people-united.ca

Subscribe now

Tip via Kofi/Stripe

E-transfer tips within Canada:
ADMIN-PU@proton.me

Series #2 NAME THEFT – Part 2 You're Trapped in Their 'Trust'

People-United Uncensored — Sun, 26 Jul 2026 12:01:39 GMT

All of the content that is put out on this Substack is free. If you feel so inclined to donate or Sign up for a Paid Subscription that is very much appreciated. It will keep us researching, writing, putting out educational content and continuing the largest exposure of crimes against Canadians ever. With more financial support, we can access more researchers to help with the exposures.

From the Roman times, a legal tactic called Cestui que Trust was used by private corporations, such as the Vatican (1^st corporation created) and the British Queen, to take possession of land and other property under the pretext that while individuals were away fighting the wars, their properties would be cared for by the Kings or Queens of the day. However, these royals knew that most of the individuals would never return and they would take the properties without paying a cent to beneficiaries. It is important you understand this legal tactic as it is still used against us today. See here.

Often, when one dies intestate (without a will) and has no beneficiaries, the government takes all property, it is liquidated and the money eventually flows through the central banks to the World Bank controlled by the Vatican and Rothschilds.

These types of trusts are imposed on the people of the former Commonwealth to this day, without the knowledge or consent of the citizens. It is pretty much the reason why Canada’s corporate mafia governments act as though they own all Canadians.

The entire Mafia parent corporation network controlled by the corporate Vatican and fictitious Queens/Kings becomes the owner of every man, woman and child through their Cestui que Trust setups. One of the ways those trusts work is through the conversion of Statements of Live Births (records) into Birth Certificates (registered securities traded on the commercial market).

The process of conversion that started in Canada in 1931 during the Great Depression, involves the distortion of a child’s given name into a legal entity (fiction), sufficiently similar to the child’s given name that even as adults they never learn the trick to their enslavement and their names are constantly distorted by every corporation for all purposes.

This 4-minute video explains the ‘Birth Certificate’ trick (archived here) used in Canada and the USA.

The worst thing that can happen to a newborn is for the parent to apply (register) for a birth certificate. All the child ever needs is his birth record (Statement of Live Birth) which is not a pledge as is the security called a ‘certificate’. There is a world of difference between a ‘statement’ and ‘record’ of a human birth, and a certificate creating a commodity.

One of the best explanations about the commercial purpose of Birth Certificates is here. Anna von Reitz’s ‘Me, You and the Chickens’ explains the purpose of birth certificates in the corporate control of human beings: This is how the birth certificate criminality applies to the USA but it is no different in CANADA…the same banksters and globalists apply this fraud across the world.

“Birth certificates are clearinghouse receipts. They are not proof of anything but events which took place at specific times and places, providing a provenance which the actual owner may use to reclaim their estate.
These certificates are meant to work like a coat check receipt. Your Mother unknowingly “deposits” your estate with the clearinghouse (DTCC) and the clearinghouse gives back a certificate for the “cargo” being transferred.
This transfer creates two new “persons” — it leaves behind an “infant decedent estate” in the original land jurisdiction where you were physically born, and it creates a new British Territorial Person “representing” you on the High Seas and Navigable Inland Waterways.
This is your First Birth Certificate, sometimes called “the Long Form” or “Certificate of Live Birth” which unlawfully converts your political status to that of a British Territorial U.S. Citizen as if you were an Officer in the Armed Forces or someone born in a Territory of the United States — like Puerto Rico.
This Person is a British Subject functioning under Admiralty Law, and may also be prosecuted under the Spanish Law of the Inquisition. Approximately seven years later, the British Territorial Person named after you is declared missing, presumed dead. This creates a Cestui Que Vie trust which is created in Washington, DC and redeposited with the Clearinghouse (DTCC) which issues a second BIRTH CERTIFICATE, sometimes called “the Short Form” which shows your Given Name in ALL CAPITAL letters.
This Municipal PERSON is considered a “citizen of the United States” thanks to the Diversity Clause in Federal Title 28. It functions under Maritime (Commercial) Law and Administrative Law.
You now have two estates— an infant decedent estate created when your Mother unwittingly “waived” your birthright estate “for” you as an infant, and a Municipal Government Cestui Que Vie ESTATE TRUST created for you when you were still in Grade School.
You also have two clearing house certificates — that is, birth certificates, documenting the deposits made with the DTCC Clearinghouse and the transfers of the “cargoes” from the land to the sea and from the sea to the Municipal land jurisdiction.
In theory you should be able to take these clearinghouse certificates which are issued in your name to the Federal Reserve Bank holding the deposit receipts—- and reclaim your estate free and clear.
However, nobody ever tells you what has been done and that both these estates—one private and one public, both belong to you. And nobody is identified as the Officer responsible for returning your purloined estate and no process or forms are provided for you to exercise your Reversionary trust interest.
So, the deceptively named clearinghouse receipts called “Birth Certificates” are not about you or your actual Nativity on the land and soil of this country, instead they reveal where a Uniformed British Territorial Officer — a Medical Doctor— took possession of you and your estate and then proceeded to misidentify and impersonate you as a U.S. Citizen— and then by the process of “registration” transferred you and your estate to the British Territorial jurisdiction. Then the second transfer and certificate provides evidence of the “presumption of death” and creation of a Municipal public interest Cestui Que Vie ESTATE in YOUR NAME.
This is why there are two clearinghouse certificates and two estates in your name. All this to say that the Birth Certificate says nothing about my Nativity but everything about where the Undeclared Foreign Agent latched onto me, the false presumptions he made about me, and the disposition he made of my estate — none of which was disclosed or authorized.
The “Birth Certificates” are in fact evidence of capital crimes committed against me as a baby and a form of genocide on paper carried out against the people and lawful government of this country.
It’s the equivalent of cattle rustling carried out against people using clearinghouse transfer receipts to legalize it.
The victims don’t know what has been done, because they can’t recognize the “Birth Certificate” as a clearinghouse receipt. The Mother acts without the benefit of Disclosure and the baby is too young to know anything about what is happening. So any such misnamed “Birth Certificate” says nothing about me or my Nativity. It’s a transfer record only.
Those records —not registrations—- that establish the place of my provenance in Wisconsin and other details of my Nativity, exist as entries in the Family Bible and publication of my birth announcement in the newspapers and church bulletins and similar publications at the time. They show that a daughter, Anna Maria, was born to an older married couple, LaVera and Emmett Riezinger, in a little town called Neillsville, Wisconsin, at 11:58 PM on the Sixth of June in the year of 1956. This event was later documented by Dr. Robert Krohn, of Black River Falls, Wisconsin, who was not the attending physician. All hospital records and registrations have long since been destroyed. Only the Birth Certificates showing the transfers of my estate remain and the Deposit Records of the Federal Reserve Bank of Chicago which show my name as the “Authorized Representative” of my own estate, while they retain an unauthorized and undisclosed claim of ownership interest in my estate and continue to use my estate as collateral backing their corporate debts.
Obviously, this is all self-interested fraud. This paper trail represents illegally seizing upon an American baby native to Wisconsin and Shanghaiing her Good Name and Estate first to the (Territorial) State of Wisconsin and then to the (Municipal) STATE OF WISCONSIN.
This process of press-ganging, unlawful conversion, impersonation, and “human” trafficking has been outlawed for over 200 years. It has been a capital crime worldwide since 1926. Nonetheless, this is what has been done to millions upon millions of American babies since 1922.This process secretively strips the victims of their Constitutional Guarantees and property rights — and all of this is done without any disclosure to the victims or their parents.”

~ Judge Anna von Reitz

If you have the old green laminated birth certificate card, look for the stamp on the back of it denoting that it is a “revenue receipt”.

For more details, see our EDUCATION FRAUD series because by controlling all education and media, the Vatican-mafia corporations of the world, can keep us blind to our enslavement.

MUST SEE: THE ’Code 96 DECEPTION’ series coming soon to learn how this double dipping works.

Commonwealth countries are ‘trust’ territories under the ‘trusteeship’ of the United Nations and all their citizens are subjected to this enslavement.

The Queen/King is the Pope’s Arch-Treasurer for the Commonwealth, and the Rothschilds are the Vatican’s Bankers. The Rothchilds fund the British Royals as part of a deal sealed over 200 years ago that Rothchilds would float their boat after the British Empires collapse in return for breeding rights.

Those countries that refuse to abide the Mafia corporation system are destroyed: their leaders are defamed as tyrants, terrorists, and the countries bombed and invaded, with the leaders replaced by Mafia corporation-controlled puppets. This happened to Libya’s Gadhafi, Iraq’s Hussein and many others who wanted out of the Mafia system.

Yet, no Pope, Queen, King, Prime Minister, President, etc. has ever produced a single contract proving that (a) GOD gave them power over humans and (b) that humans ever consented to being in these Cestui que Trust arrangements. NOT a single time!

All contracts by private corporations masquerading as ‘government’ are unlawful and forced on men and women via criminal coercion, racketeering, constructive frauds, deception, extortion, personation, treason and without full disclosure.

LOGICAL FALLACIES GET YOU EVERY TIME!

Do you know the 3 main logical fallacies (mistakes) you fall prey to? Sometimes the name of a fallacy can give you an idea of what the fallacy/mistake is.

The Strawman Fallacy (archived here):

This is a main tool of lawyers to defeat perfectly good claims in court. They simply change the claim wording and fight that.

The basic structure of the argument consists of Person A making a claim, Person B creating a distorted version of the claim (the “strawman” version of the original claim), and then Person B attacks this distorted version to refute Person A’s original assertion.

Often, the distorted interpretation is only remotely related to the original claim. The opposing argument may focus on just one aspect of the claim, take it out of context or exaggerate it. The strawman argument, in this way, is an example of a red herring. It’s meant to distract from the real issue being discussed and is not a logically valid argument.

Put another way, you beat-up a pretend opponent (strawman) that you created. You can also, instead of beating up a pretend opponent, you set out to show you are smart and your opponent is stupid, by attacking his/her argument or claims, but instead of attacking his/her actual argument or fact, instead you make up arguments, you make up claims and then attack the things you made up instead of attacking your opponent’s actual position. This is the strawman fallacy: you attack your own misrepresentation of your opponent’s position rather than your opponent’s actual position. And this is how lawyers practice.

A perfect example is where the Prime Minister is asked to explain why he is locking down the economy given the evidence that there is no reason to do so, and he pivots to attacking his made-up racism issue (straw issues) and suggests anyone who asks such a question is a racist or a right-wing extremist.

The most important example is how the government converts your name to a legal entity (strawman) by distorting the way it is styled (all capitalization and commas as an example), then makes you responsible for the new entity.

Fallacy of Illicit Conversion (Logical Fallacy) (archived here): This is when you reverse the subject and predicate, then pretend you are saying the same thing. Here’s an example of illicit conversion: All communists are atheists. Therefore, all atheists are communists. This is not done in proper English, but it is done as part of legalese (DOG-Latin deception).

Fallacy of Equivocation (archived here): This is when a word or phrase is used with a different meaning or ambiguously to create a fallacy. In 2006, George Bush stated: ‘The United States does not torture.’ Looking at this statement, it seems clear. However, this was an equivocation fallacy because George Bush’s statement was true but only based on a special definition he gave the word ‘torture.’ His definition of torture left out waterboarding and mock execution.

Another example is where ‘case’ in medical terms means someone is symptomatic (sick), but the opponent uses the term ‘case’ to also mean non-symptomatic. So as the federal government and public health authorities demonstrated, in their improvised language, whether you are sick or not, you are a ‘medical case’.

This was done during COVID, when a-symptomatic patients were referred to as ‘cases’, even though their true issues had nothing to do with COVID. You may remember how those who died of injuries in a motorcycle accident or drowning were added as COVID ‘cases’.

Yet another example is how the World Health Organization (WHO) changed the definition of ‘pandemic’ to ensure that any made-up health crisis can be declared a pandemic and subject to lockdown, but the public was left to believe that ‘pandemic’ was about as serious as a medical situation can get (the common understanding of the term).

DEPRIVED OF OUR GIVEN NAMES

We are kept totally ignorant of the facts surrounding how the corporate governments, especially in commonwealth countries such as Canada, enslave the people, and especially ignorant of how our given names are distorted to create corporate legal entities, such as a ‘legal person’ without our knowledge or consent, sealing the deal when it comes to creating ‘commodities’ and ‘securities’ out of human beings. This distortion and creation of a legal entity happens with EVERY corporation you deal with. Check your Birth Certificate, you bills from Rogers/Bell, your hydro bill, your water bill…differing versions of legal entities.

Duhaime’s Law Dictionary definition of ‘Name’ is seen here.

The right to a name is often considered to be a basic human right. For example, the 1976 United Nations International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR) seen here at Article 24(2) states:

“Every child shall be registered immediately after birth and shall have a name.”

Did you catch the criminal UN’s trick? Instead of the event of the birth of every child being ‘recorded’, it is saying every child must be registered, which means turned into a legal entity, certificated and turned into a commodity for which there is a ‘certificate’.

The Justinian Deception of 530-560 AD that we discussed in Part 1, of course, has expanded over the centuries into what we know as ‘legalese’, a bastardized language with its own ‘dictionary’, that is neither classic LATIN or true English. To learn about the difference between lawful and legal, and other important terms, access this video.

The predominant ‘law’ dictionary is the Black’s Law Dictionary (presently in its 11^th edition) defining legal terms and if you take a moment to look up the words ‘understanding’ and ‘including or includes’ and ‘person’ in both the Black’s Law Dictionary and the Oxford Dictionary, you will see the astounding differences in their meanings compared to how we consider them in everyday usage, which of course, is what defeats us in our so-called Courts of Justice and in all contracts in which we partake.

For an interesting article on the history of naming individuals, click here.

At this point, you probably realize why LATIN was removed from the classroom. Let’s face it, if you took English and you took LATIN classes, soon you would see that English and LATIN were corrupted into DOG-Latin, a totally fictitious mixture of languages that results in dire consequences for human beings.

This is true proper English: My name is my own and can not be stolen by government.
This is classic LATIN: Nomen-meum-est-meum-et-non-potest-auferri-per-imperium or MY-NAME-IS-MY-OWN-AND-CAN-NOT-BE-STOLEN-BY-GOVERNMENT.
This is DOG-Latin: MY NAME IS MY OWN AND CAN NOT BE STOLEN BY GOVERNMENT.

It is not possible to get an exact, word-for-word translation of the English into the LATIN, because the grammatical requirements and word orders are so different.

If you want to have some fun or are curious to see how difficult it is to merge English and LATIN, go here.

** Note the absence of the hyphens in the bastardized English and debased LATIN version creates an entirely new language called DOG-Latin or legalese. IT IS MEANINGLESS. The problem is that you presume it has meaning.

Also, please let us know if any of our hyperlinks have stopped working so that we can fix them. Thank you.

People-United
people-united.ca

Subscribe now

Tip via Kofi/Stripe

E-transfer tips within Canada:
ADMIN-PU@proton.me

Series #2 NAME THEFT – Part 1 They Even Steal Your Given Name!

People-United Uncensored — Thu, 23 Jul 2026 12:02:46 GMT

The entire subject of how you were robbed of your birth name by corporations is fundamental to your getting free of the chains of debt slavers known as banksters and communist government traitors. Your given name is your personal property, it’s your most important private property for their exclusive use. In this series we will dive into the scheme that converts us into commodities.

NAME THEFT – how corporate governments turned YOUR Given Name into a legal person (commodity, strawman, trade name), and now own you, body, mind, DNA and all your ‘private property’.

Do you know the horrors of the coming digital identity guardianship corporate enslavement?

Quick Points …

A trick language was developed over 1,000 years ago by Roman Emperor Justinian I who took advantage of the fact that the written Latin word often sounded like the spoken word when read and that that spoken Latin and English sounded much the same. Justinian was also known as Justinian the Great for his role in reviving the failed Roman Empire and rewriting Roman Law from 527 to 565.
Justinian remains well-known for his judicial reforms, particularly through the complete revision of all Roman law, something that had not previously been attempted. The total of Justinian’s legislation is known today as the Corpus juris civilis. See more about his reforms that impact us all today, here.
During those middle-ages of Roman rule, Latin was the language of the elite – King’s court advisors, royalty, philosophers, priests, Popes, and so on…they were the only people literate in Latin. Since most people were illiterate, it was easy to tell the peasants one thing but write another into law or contracts because both sounded the same when spoken.
As this language scheme came to be used in most countries and especially as the British Empire developed, so too did the language and the ability of the elite to trick the public. It is no accident that many words today have two spellings. For example: hear/here, their/there, check/cheque, and so on.
The “Universal” Language: For centuries, Latin served as the lingua franca of the Western Church. Chanting (such as you hear during Catholic masses) allowed the liturgy to remain consistent, recognizable, and “unified” across different cultures and nations, regardless of the local vernacular. Common speaking however did not have the ‘chant’.
As centuries passed, Latin fell out of use except in the Catholic Church, and Latin words were translated as closely as possible to an English-sounding version and used in legal circles, while the true English term meant something entirely different.
An example is the word ‘person’. In pure English it means an individual man or woman or child. Used in legalese, it means corporations, associations, legal entities. Used in Latin, where it is ‘persona’, the term had a context dependent on the structure and order of the written words since there is no ‘a’ or ‘the’ in Latin.
Untrained in legalese -- a totally separate language from English that sounds like English with its own dictionary -- we are left today to presume we are all speaking the same language, pure English, when in court or talking to a lawyer or lawyer-politician.
Because we presume everyone is speaking and writing pure English and that each word carries the meaning we commonly know, we also think we know what the words that lawyers, rules and regulations mean, and we are always incorrect.
The legal profession has gone so far as to mix two languages, English and Latin. You will see many legal statements made where the statement appears to be English but incorporates a Latin term. The English has been debased as a result and the Latin term is completely outside the context of the full Latin statement required for a Latin term to be interpreted correctly.
Lawyers are responsible for keeping us enslaved by this trick language called legalese, also known as DOG-Latin or debased Latin. It works because we presume we are all speaking and writing pure English.
This enslavement has evolved over a period of about 1500 years, until today, we see a name that looks like ours and we presume it refers to us, the human man or woman. For example, DOE, JANE or DOE, Jane is not the individual, it is a fictitious name conjured up by some commercial entity. Jane is the individual. Doe is the collective (the family). The fictions are simply used in commerce while tricking the individual into thinking it is also referring to her.
You may see commercial names written in lower case, but those are trade-marks which are images and not text.
Latin is a dead language and internet browsers cannot easily translate Latin symbols into any other language. This makes it difficult to explain the language debasement and trickery that has evolved over the past 1500 years. It makes it harder because there were many versions of Latin operating at one time…Roman, Greek, Classical, Medieval, etc.
Latin grammar is much different from English grammar, creating even more issues for those trying to navigate the DOG-Latin/legalese that lawyers subject us to. For example, there is no ‘a’ or ‘the’ in Latin. Nor is the order of the words as important as in other languages. It is beyond the scope of this post to explain the nuances of a language no longer in use, but it is the scarcity of readily available resources and of the necessary education in languages that keep the ordinary man and woman unable to see when the statements made by lawyers and lawyer-judges and lawyer-politicians are corruptions.
From the original Justinian deception evolved the practice, in more recent times (starting in 1931), of commoditizing the newborn by changing their given name into a written form that when spoken sounded the same, but which are significantly different in status. A given name applies to a human being. A corrupted given name -- such as by all capitalization, by reversal of the order of the family name and given name, or by styling the given name and family name incorrectly --is a legal person also called a legal fiction.
Your given name was stolen at birth and turned into a fictitious legal entity, commonly known as the ‘strawman’, or in legal circles ‘a person’. Then you were trained to accept responsibility for that entity (strawman) that is stated on your Birth Certificate, even though it was created by a corporation to trick you.
You have been enslaved by your legal entity/strawman since birth. The corporate government did that to create the commodity/security called the birth certificate, but all corporations you deal with create a legal fiction for you. The legal fiction in your municipality may look entirely different from the one created by your internet provider and so on.
If you do nothing else to educate yourself about this enslavement by corporations and legal language, go here and watch the video explanations by the world’s leading expert (Romley Stewart) on ‘The Perfect Crime’ that is central to all other harms men and women have suffered and continue to suffer.
Romley Stewart and his partner, who finally broke the code as to how all this entrapment occurred was beaten almost to death, imprisoned in England and tortured for refusing to stop teaching this truth. Obviously, the elite would not do that if his teachings were nonsense.
In addition to what the Romans started, the Vatican since 1577, has used 3 Cestui que Trusts and given name theft to enslave every individual ever born anywhere on earth and to steal all property. The Royals never have their given names distorted, so why should the common man and woman’s names be distorted, except that they are being harmed?
All Canadians are owned lock, stock and barrel by corporations and lawyers -- the governments of Canada being the major corporate enslavers. Even the courts are private for-profit corporations listed on Dun & Bradstreet. Corporations are considered ‘dead’ because they are created in the mind of man and not by God, which creates living things.
Proof that you are being subjected to language fraud and deceptions is found in a Styles manual that states how official documents are to be styled grammatically. Even though there are styling standards to be followed, the Canadian government and its corporate buddies treat men and women with great indignity by refusing to properly style our given names.
Changing the name of an individual without their consent is illegal, and identity theft (Change of Name Act). But the legal profession claims it is not changing the name of the individual; it is simply creating a legal fiction/term/name not attached to a human being and they can’t stop human beings from thinking that a legal fiction/term/name that looks like their given names refers to themselves.
EVERY document you get from the government or corporation refers to your strawman or ‘legal entity’. You end up paying the bills for your strawman, when they should be coming out of the money kept in a Trust for all Canadians (see Consolidated Revenue Fund here), which is the earnings from the sale of resources, excise and corporate taxes and so on.
The distortion and all-capitalization of a name turned a free republic (Republic of United States) into a corporatocracy (United States of America, Inc.) in 1931. One only has to look at historical land records and birth records to see how the given and family names of people were styled in correct English, but after 1931, started to be styled as legal fictions. In Ontario, Canada, the replacement of the rightful owner’s given name on a land Parcel Register with a fiction created by the private for-profit corporation TERANET started in 1992. It is easy to expose and has been done by People-United in Series #2 PROPERTY THEFT starting here.
Today, Artificial Intelligence (AI) is programmed to repeat the deception by claiming that courts recognize the ALL CAPS name to be a human, when nothing can be further from the truth. As far as AI is concerned, if the government and the courts state something, that is to be taken as authoritative.
By 2020, the United Nations world government has announced the establishment of Digital Identification and Digital Wallet, and the corporate guardianship and ownership of your digital entity (identification), is now law.

Must Watch this explanatory video: the best explanation ever of the difference SLAVERY v. SOVEREIGN.

Emperor Justinian I Created the De-based Language Enslaving Us Today

In 530-560 AD, Roman Emperor Justinian I created what is today known as the Justinian Deception. This creation is the main and root controlling factor in our enslavement. He discovered that the Classical Latin written language in which the elite were educated and by which they communicated, sounded like English and that the two unrelated languages with radically different written versions could be used to create DOG-Latin, a debased language, the sole purpose of which is to trick the illiterate and ignorant, which at the time was the majority of the population.

Justinian in fact was mostly successful in reviving the collapsed Roman Empire through his legal reforms that involved tricking the populace…they heard one thing, he wrote into law something entirely different.

To learn about the Justinian Deception – the mother of all deceptions, see here. Judge Anna von Reitz also explains DOG-Latin well here showing how the parasites have used fraud and deception to enslave Americans in their schemes. This of course, applies to all former commonwealth countries, such as Canada and Australia.

It is noteworthy that today, we can be found to be illiterate for the most part because many people cannot read or write pure English, and many millions of others can function only at the grade 5 level in any environment that requires reading and writing. Millions now type only a group of single letters instead of writing out a proper sentence. For example IMHO (in my humble opinion).

Do you know that almost half of all Canadian adults have low literacy skills (48%)? In the province of Ontario, 42% of adults do not have the literacy skills they need for home, work and life. In 2011, 22.4% of Canadians between the ages of 25 and 64 did not have a high school diploma.

Worse, the literacy skills they do have are based on DOG-Latin and not true English. Thus, they are ripe for the picking by corporations who use fraudulent language in contracts to keep them in debt for life. Here is a mainstream media article on the subject, and you can get more here.

It is essential that you read several times the explanation provided by one of the two men who paid a very high personal price for working out this deception and exposing it to the masses. Click here (archived here) for ‘JUSTINIAN-DECEPTION: (HIDDEN-FOREIGN-TEXT-KNOWN-AS-DOG-LATIN) The Mother of all Deceptions: The Concept of Modern Day Slavery’ by Romley Stewart.

You will enjoy interviews with Romley Stewart, Part 1 and Part 2.

WITHOUT THIS KNOWLEDGE YOU WILL REMAIN ‘LOST’ AND A SLAVE!

As Nobel Prize winner Amartya Sen says: “Literacy is freedom.”

The Language Deception

First, we must explain about the dead language called Latin.

Google Translate and standard search algorithms struggle with Latin because word order is flexible and meaning relies almost entirely on inflections (word endings) rather than position.

Unlike English, where “The dog bites the man” differs from “The man bites the dog”, by syntax Latin sentences like the translations ex-nudo-pacto-actio-non-oritur and quod ex nudopacto non orituractio are grammatically identical; search engines typically fail to match permutations or ignore critical case endings, leading to “word salad” results or missed hits.

Additionally, there is less training data available for Latin compared to modern languages, as it is a “dead” language with limited contemporary usage. This lack of massive parallel corpora means neural machine translation models are less accurate, and general search engines do not prioritize or index Latin texts as effectively as they do for widely spoken modern languages.

If you try to search “Latin text with hyphens between the words” you will get either no search result or something like this:

lorem-ipsum-dolor-sit-amet, or LOREM-IPSUM-DOLOR-SIT-AMET (the hyphen was sometimes a light dot)

There are a variety of Latin texts. A few are the Classical and modern printed Latin, the Medieval manuscripts, Ancient Roman inscriptions that used dots or separators between words (e.g., SENATVS·POPVLVSQVE·ROMANVS) rather than spaces.

Since our enslavement started with the Romans and their debasing of Latin text of the time, we will focus on explaining how the debasing of Roman Latin and the bastardization of pure English gave us the DOG-Latin of today. Combined with the use of glossa and margins our debt slavery was entrenched.

For effective searching for Latin classical texts you can use specialized resources such as: The Packard Humanities Institute (PHI) Latin Texts; The Latin Library; MLAT (University of Zurich) medieval Latin corpora and Google Books.

A few important things about the Latin language:

In Latin, word order is much more flexible than in English because grammatical endings carry much of the information that English expresses through word order and function words;
Latin does not have a definite article (”the”) or an indefinite article (”a/an”), so a phrase like “the cat” would usually just be one Latin noun (for example, fēlis or cattus depending on context), without a separate word for “the”;
Some authors use hyphens or faint centred dots to show that a group of words should be understood as a single unit when translating or analyzing grammar;
For example, if an English phrase is:
the cat on the mat
a Latin teacher might write a literal gloss such as:
the-cat on-the-mat (it is a glossa because there is no ‘the’ in Latin)
That statement in Latin would likely look like this depending on the context:
Cattus in matta or cattus-in-matta
joining several words with hyphens to indicate that they function together semantically. The hyphens are part of the author’s explanatory system.
Authors also often must use a technique called an interlinear gloss, where each Latin word is matched to an English equivalent, even though there would be no English equivalent if the context the Latin word was in had not been separated out. Linguists often use hyphens to connect elements that belong together grammatically.

You will learn about gloss, glossa and glossary later in this series, as well as the role of text in margins, for these are the ‘trick’ components that cause us to believe ‘lies’.

To understand how it evolved that the world is enslaved by the elite in a wealth-transfer and property theft scheme, we must go back to 1577, when the corrupt corporation (Roman creation) know today as the VATICAN, set up fraudulent trusts to appoint themselves trustees of everything we are and own the moment we are born; we the ‘beneficiaries’ get only what the ‘trustee’ wants us to have.

This document is a must read about Cestui que Vie Trust (3 in total) set up starting in 1577 and how they operate today. You will see, about ½ way through the document, proof that the Royals themselves do not have their name distorted and are not enslaved by Birth Certificates that replaced Statements of Live Birth records.

This is a summary of the 3 Cestui que Vie Trusts and the specific Canon Laws that affect us still today.

While the above two links take you to summaries, details of the creation of Cestui que Vie Trusts and Crowns by successive Vatican Papal Bulls as provided in this special document is of utmost importance. That People-United special will help you understand how we got into a position of debt slave to fictitious legal entities called corporations.

Your soul, body, mind and all property have been stolen, along with your birth/given name. To understand your enslavement and how to get free, you must understand the role that Cestui que Vie Trusts play in your life, how they were created by morally-bankrupt Popes, and how they were continued by private central banks and BAR lawyers under Rothschild dynasty control.

Our 2^nd special document is about the Papacy, the Pope and the creation of the CROWN. You learn how -- using Canon Laws that rule over every single individual and corporation in the world -- municipalities in Canada ‘incorporated’ every resident into their for-profit corporation without their consent or knowledge.

The simple truth about the entire massive lie we call government in Canada (and all Commonwealth countries), is that there is no legitimate de jure government. (de jure is Latin for ‘right’, ‘legally binding’.

Long ago, we were collectively tricked into waiving our status as land dwellers under common law, to become fictional legal entities in the merchant/commerical law world call corpus juris.

As a result of this trickery, we have been lured into permanent enslavement and debt, and the conversion of humanity to a commodity.

‘THE-CORPUS-JURIS (Babylon Law) and the Magna Carta’ is a must watch explanation of how British common law and sovereignty was surrendered to the criminal foreign corporation, the United Nations.

It was all done through Babylonian language manipulation started many centuries ago (aka Justinian Emperor’s Deception) and perfected since then. Improving gradually through the centuries, the deception blended two entirely different spoken and written languages (English and LATIN) into a bastardized English language, that when spoken, sounded English, when in fact the resulting written ‘language’ had no meaning whatsoever, let alone a meaning that corresponded to the English statement.

Lawyers are responsible for keeping us in this mental slave camp through their imposition of legalese/Babylonian language. It’s also referred to as DOG-Latin. Had they not stopped teaching Latin in high school, people would have noticed the misuse of LATIN and English, which are two separate languages.

The other thing that the legal profession did was to insert Latin words into English sentences. Words such as ab initio, de facto, de jure, quid pro quo and so on are all Latin. There was no reason for using Latin terms in English text, because it is not English text; it is legalese and this action is consistent with debasing pure and correct English grammar.

Lawyers, lawyer-judges and lawyer-politicians got away with this deception for centuries because most people were illiterate. Now the internet is educating people rather quickly. Since internet content simply uses common language and quotes from the legal profession, the debasing of English continues.

EVERY DOCUMENT USED BY THE Corporate GOVERNMENT, THE BANKS AND THE COURTS have been ‘glossed’, meaning that ‘the words are not there’.

Let’s start reverse-engineering this lie from the beginning.

The organizations that control our world avoid prosecution in the nations where they operate using these language deceptions by declaring themselves city-states. They have carved out their own sovereign countries from the land mass of sovereign nations. They are untouchable by governments of nations that want to stop this enslavement.

A city-state is an independent, self-governing country contained totally within the borders of a single city. They serve as the center of political, economic, and cultural life over its contiguous territory (that is, the nation out of which the city was carved), but are not subject to the laws of the nation out of which they were carved.

Put another way, a city-state, or a sovereign state, is essentially an entire country that is held within the confines of just one city. They are usually very, very small in acreage. The power they wield is unimaginable to most of us.

Examples of ‘sovereign city-states’ are the City of London, Washington DC, Vatican City, Singapore, and Monaco.

Western World controlled by the BAR Association fictitious language

The City of London and its BAR administrators control the entire western world’s merchants, banks, sea commerce, and militaries. (BAR = British Accreditation Society for lawyers). They control the language.

The City of London/BAR lawyer associations are ALL FOREIGN, their language is foreign; they are counterfeits set up to deceive the masses into believing that a foreign corporate entity is their government. They are the administrative section of the entire Western World including and especially Canada.

It is the BAR association of the City of London that created the Chicago Manual of Style (CMoS) used by the City of London in their ‘business’ dealings, and therefore by every nation in which they operate.

The founding fathers of the Republic of United States and its Constitution recognized the BAR deceptions and the 13^th Amendment to the US Constitution indicated ‘No lawyers allowed in public office’. The original document and the explanation about why lawyers were not supposed to be allowed in public office is preserved here.

During the chaos of the Great Depression, lawyers managed to hide the exact wording of the 13^th Amendment to keep Americans ignorant, and therefore the entire government structure is polluted with corrupt, morally and ethically bankrupt lawyers who serve a foreign entity.

This is because BAR lawyers have sworn an Oath to a foreign deity (City of London), a sovereign state that is one square mile in size and controlled by the Vatican that also controls all other sovereign city-states.

Chicago Manual of Style (CMoS)

The Chicago Manual of Style (CMoS) is the KEY to understanding the language lies (fictions) that created a fictitious world that is void of the Magna Carta and laws of the land.

The BAR association lawyers use the CMoS with its Babylonian DOG-Latin, bastardized English, to keep everyone ignorant and enslaved by fraudulent legislation. (All western nations are controlled by the City of London/BAR Associations.)

By exploiting our ignorance of the language deception, they have gradually replaced our common law courts and courts of equity (de jure, Law of the Land) with their commercial THE-CORPUS-JURIS Courts, also known as Babylonian Law and Law of the Sea.

Note, however, they didn’t literally replace common law (Law of the Land) with the Law of the Sea (merchant/commercial Babylonian law). What they did was convince us to see them as one and the same. They conflated the two laws (the one for people and the one for corporations).

When we men and women enter a Canadian court, we are not entering as human beings in the view of the BAR lawyer and Judges; we are entering a commercial court as legal fictions/entities because we have been led to believe that is all there is for men and women and we go along with merchant/commercial law. They have erased the existence of Common Law and Courts of Equity from our minds over time and gradually dismantled physical Common Law and Courts of Equity, including Grand Juries.

Since 1985, the BAR has installed the United Nation’s Administrative Law Tribunals, thereby going even further to replace domestic courts with tribunals. In regular courts you are innocent until proven guilty. In Administrative Law Tribunal systems, you are guilty if an official says you are and the only issue to negotiate is the amount of penalty. These have again a whole new language built from continuing to debase English. As digital technology replaces live ‘administrators’ the chance of getting any justice or a fair hearing is an illusion.

To truly understand how the Chicago Manual of Style is the language of deception that keeps humans enslaved in a commercial world, YOU MUST WATCH Hyphen-Glitch (archived here) by Romley Stewart, the leading expert on the language deception operating to keep us enslaved for almost two thousand years.

The CMoS, as with all other styles manuals, tells us that no two languages, including sign languages, correspond to one another. Thus the ‘translation’ between languages is never exact. You may hear someone speaking and another signing the statement(s), but the Signer is not translating word for word from English to hand signs. Similarly with Latin, the original language of the elite, cannot be translated word for word to English. It is not possible to exactly translate the words due to the significant difference in grammar rules and syntax.

The fact that the CMoS tells us that no two languages correspond to one another, is also telling us that text such as found in the margins of what the Vital Statistics office tells us is the Long Form Birth Certificate, are meaningless because it does not follow proper English styling.

If it is meaningless, it is a lie to lead us to believe that it is a Birth Certificate when in fact it is a Statement of Live Birth and nothing more until they added the glossa. It is a record and not a certificate. The lie (one of many) is that they used the likeness of our name and used the event of a human birth to create a tradeable commodity in commerce. What in fact they created by writing and putting their seal in the margin is to create a commercial clearing house receipt.

Following below is another example of how words are installed in the margins of important documents, but they are meaningless because they do not follow proper grammar and styling of any language. It is merely the corporate criminal’s way of communicating without our realizing what they are actually doing is criminal.

At the top of page 666 of the CMoS, notice the ALL CAPS (no hyphen) text that is the title to the section: LANGUAGES OTHER THAN ENGLISH. This section header is neither English, which would have been written ‘Languages other than English’. Nor is it LATIN, which would have been written ‘linguaealiumquamanglicus’, or ‘linguae-alium-quam-anglicus’ or ‘LANGUAGES-OTHER-THAN-ENGLISH’ if you tried to translate it word for word.

As printed on page 666, the header is meaningless.

At the bottom of page 665 under the title ‘American Sign Language (ASL)’, the Manual states that ASL is sign language written down in text but looking like English when it’s not English text.

IMPORTANT: Three lines at the very top of page 666 tell you other languages have no correspondence or relevance to English text.

Page 666 of the CMoS

The CMoS states that when using glosses (cover-up text) from the spoken or written language to represent signs, there is no one-to-one correlation or correspondence between the words or signs in any two languages such as English and LATIN or English and ASL.

Why are they talking about ‘signs’ you might wonder.

American Sign Language (ASL) is a complete, natural language that has the same linguistic properties as spoken languages, but with grammar that differs from English and Latin. In fact, no other language has grammar that corresponds to sign language.

ASL is expressed by movements of the hands and face. There is no corresponding written version of ASL. It is the primary language of many North Americans who are deaf and hard of hearing and is used by some hearing people as well. One who signs may finger-spell an English word, but it is English, not sign.

Thus, when someone is signing while another is speaking English, they are not signing the English language, anymore than an English-French translator is translating English. Instead they are taking the context, order of words and syntax and adapting what the translator believes is meant into a new language structure.

Because Latin is no longer in use, there is no true ‘Latin’ to English translation, but the bastardization that happened centuries ago to conflate the two languages persists. What we are taught in school is not pure English.

The lie is that most of what is written in ‘law’ today is bastardized English and de-based Latin and meaningless. This results in our believing words such as ‘person’ and ‘includes’ means what we think is meant in English, but the original Latin terms for those words mean something entirely different and are used in different contexts in a Latin statement.

What was also brought forward was the tactic of selecting isolated Latin terms from original Latin text and inserting them into English text -- such as de novo, ab initio, etc. Sometimes they are spelled out de-novo, ab-initio and so on.

This insertion of individual Latin terms taken out of the context of a Latin text, and inserted into a pure English statement, is just another way the elite got the uneducated accustomed to blending the two languages into what would be a new language, except that is not the way language is created.

Glossa, Glossary

Oxford English Dictionary definitions of Gloss/Glossa, Glossary, Glossed over

Glossa/Gloss: a noun. An attractive appearance that is only on the surface and hides what is not so attractive; gloss (on something) a way of explaining something to make it seem more attractive or acceptable; gloss (on something) a note or comment added to a piece of writing to explain a difficult word or phrase.
Glossary: a noun. A list of technical or special words, especially those in a particular text, explaining their meanings.
Gloss over something: a phrasal verb. To avoid talking about something unpleasant or embarrassing by not dealing with it in detail.

From this you can understand that the CMoS, when referring to the use of glosses, is referring to the use of words or text to cover up untrue, unpleasant or embarrassing English text, that a glossary in legal books is a list of the special lies and cover-ups, and that politicians gloss over the truth when answering important questions from the public.

A glossa is a word or words from the spoken language written in smaller capital letters, the same size as the lower-case letters, but full-sized capital letters may also be used as we saw on page 666 of the CMoS discussed above.

When two or more written words are used to gloss (cover-up a lie) a single sign or text, the glosses are separated by hyphens. The transcription is enclosed in double quotation marks. But in fact, it is a ‘translation’ from spoken language to gloss language, and not a true transcription of an English or LATIN word or term.

Here’s an example of the interaction of 3 entirely separate languages:

American Sign Language is not English nor Latin and is not even understood by those who use, as an example, Spanish Sign Language. The signs are not translatable to proper English or proper Latin, nor do the hand signs have corresponding written language.

The American Sign (ASL) for “a car drive by” is written as VEHICLE-DRIVE-BY in LATIN, and ‘a vehicle drive by’ or ‘car drive by’ in English. The hyphens are essential to string all the words together to make the sign in Latin, else every word stands alone and means nothing, like this:

A. CAR. DRIVE. BY.

The translation can be whatever you want it to be if you enclose the sign in the double quotes, such as the ASL translation for “a car drive by”.

Let’s look at another example:

The cat sat on the mat. (English)

cattus-sat-nava-in-matta (LATIN) If you tried to translate it to English, word for word it would be CAT-SAT-ON-MAT or Cat sat on mat, since there are no ‘a’ or ‘the’ in Latin. But ‘Cat sat on mat’ is not proper English.

THE CAT SAT ON THE MAT (Babylonian DOG-Latin, and meaningless.) Recall how the title in the margin on page 666 of the CMoS was written this very way.

When you speak all three, they all say the same. But only the English and LATIN text have meaning because they are written in proper English and proper LATIN and, in this case, they are translations of one another and happen to refer to the same thing. The translations are not of every word, but of the context.

The third, the meaningless DOG-Latin, says nothing and is THE. CAT. SAT. ON. THE. MAT. with every word being a separate sentence with a full stop. It is not proper English and definitely not Latin, but is a fraudulent combination of both that happen to sound the same when spoken. In sign language, they would not be translated as either, nor would the Signer sign every spoken word in the word order of either English or Latin.

Lawyers gloss over the moral and ethical considerations inherent in Common Law to redirect the parties in a dispute to merchant, commercial law, even though they are humans and not corporations at sea that use legal language. They do this by using Latin words in English statements.

The CMoS (Manual) therefore tells us that lawyers are expected to use glosses (lies/cover-ups) to keep us ignorant of the fact that we are not remotely subject to the Land of the Sea, the Babylonian merchant laws or the debased Latin and English statements.

Marginal Text and Gloss (cover-up lies)

Etymological breakdown of Margin:

Mar is damage

Gin is spirit

Margin = damage spirit

Marginalised = treat (a person, group, or concept) as insignificant or peripheral.

Now you can understand that lawyers, who infest every single aspect of human life, use gloss/glossa, or trick language in all the legislation they write for governments, all the contracts they write for banks and all documents they write in court, including lawyer-Judge decisions.

Marginal Text is text placed outside the main body of the text, in the margin of the page, such as a heading. You saw an example on page 666 of the CMoS discussed above. Marginal Text according to the CMoS has nothing to do with the main text on the page.

The margin is where you often find a gloss (cover-up lie) inserted into a marginal text.

Look at the certified copy of your Statement of Live Birth and note how in the margins, the legal entity titled the Registrar of Vital Statistics applied their seal and their signature. The seal and the signature therefore have absolutely no value or meaning in the event called a Live Birth of a human being that is recorded in the main body of the document. However, the legal entity’s impositions in the margins misleads us to believe it does have importance and that it is part of the process of acknowledging the birth. What it actually is, is the creation of a certificate having nothing to do with a human birth.

The most obvious clue that the margin is the administrative (legal fiction/gloss) part of any page is that the page number is written in the margin. The page number is there only to reference the text and to assist in finding sections of text but has no relevance to whatever text it references.

This is why marginal text is in many cases, if not all cases, a fiction.

We must be vigilant to make sure they don’t place the marginal pictorials into the main body of the text to confuse the masses.

If you see the fiction (gloss) text in the main body, it must be treated as if it were not there, and if this destroys the document know that was their fraudulently-prepared contract in the first place.

No fraud is a contract. Written in anything but proper English grammar and styling, a contract is a fraud and void.

You may have noticed how in legal documents such as Statements of Claims, the Court Seal and the Registrar’s signatures are outside the main body in the margins. They used to be inside the margins, in the opening of the main body, but in recent years, they have moved these corporate signs and images into the margins.

This is one of the risks that banks take: once the customer sees the fraud in a bank contract, it is all over for them. Once they see improper English text, all caps wording, improper grammar and styling, the customer can point to the contract as void.

Once the public starts to unravel the ruse, suddenly you see governments using psyops and scandals to cause chaos and wars, distracting the masses before they wake up to what has happened. Of course, they also start wars to transfer land and wealth to themselves.

When the all-caps words are not hyphenated, each word stands on its own and has no jurisdiction with previous or next word. This unhyphenated Babylonian DOG-Latin is used as glossa on your birth certificate to steal your given Christian name and turn it into a legal entity owned by the corporation that created it fraudulently. The way your name is styled on your Birth Certificate is meaningless to you as a human being…it is neither English nor Latin or any other recognized language.

When we die and a tombstone is provided, our names are in ALL CAPS Dog-Latin. Perhaps one can force the monument mason (also known as a Memorial Mason) to engrave the stone with your given name followed by your family name but expect a battle.

To see only the Chapter 4 on Capitalization in the Canadian Styles Manual, go here. The entire Canadian Styles Manual used by the government translation bureau is available only online, here.

Two Birth Documents

In this NAMES THEFT Series we will show you how you are deprived of your given name and in turn your wealth through the use of language trickery, and particularly the use of glossas (cover-ups).

Let’s start off slowly to set the stage. See here a good short explanation (archived here) by Richard Vobes of how the corrupt corporate government takes control of the child’s share of the wealth of the landmass from every child shortly after their birth, hold the child’s share in a ‘trust’ where they deprive the child of the money needed by the child’s parents to provide the necessities of life. The corporation masquerading as government does this by creating a distorted name called a legal entity, that looks like the child’s given name but isn’t and then adding meaningless text in the margins of the birth documents.

Through the Bank Act, the government allows central banks controlled by the World Bank to become the child’s personal representative.

We will dissect the entire legal entity -- also known as strawman -- fraud as we move through the various mechanisms used by corporations.

The child is never told that at the age of majority, they can become the executor and beneficiary of their own wealth, held in a trust for them for 18 years. The government and particularly the central banks, simply keep stealing the wealth accumulated in the child’s trust through their entire adulthood.

OPEN-YOUR-MIND-TO-OPEN-YOUR-EYES

IT ALL COMES DOWN TO TWO BIRTH DOCUMENTS: the one for the human created by GOD, and the one for the legal entity (legal person) created by the corporate government. The date the legal entity was created by the corporate government is the same as the date the human was born and lived 24 hours.

MUST WATCH:

1. BIRTHING-CERTIFICATES (archived here) by Romley Stewart (Nov 27, 2018)

2. HYPHEN-GLITCH (archived here) by Romley Stewart (Sep 27, 2019)

3. THE-REMEDY-WITHIN (archived here) by Romley Stewart (May 26, 2018)

In an act of conversion by grammatical trickery, the elite and their lawyers at the City of London, have tricked all westerners into converting from human beings under common law to commodities owned by foreign corporations subjected to Babylonian merchant law.

To understand how we were grammatically tricked for centuries by lawyers, which is a must if you are to understand how to get ‘sovereign’ and de-coupled from the commercial law, you MUST UNDERSTAND how glossa covers up government, land titles, banking and court fraud.

Glossas come in many forms: ALL CAPS, no hyphenated terms, underlined words, words in double quotes, words set outside the main body of text, a cross with no space between the cross and the word, and so on.

The government and banksters have created the birth certificates and installed glosses (ALL CAPS, no hyphenated words or words underlined where underlined means removed). This action converts a human being’s given names into legal entities owned by foreign corporations (he who creates owns). Since we presume that the glossa refers to us the human, we unwittingly take on the role of commodity in the corporate world.

When they place a cross in front of the word Christian with no space between them, it means dead Christian child of xyz. That’s because the cross means ‘dead’.

The registrar who signs the text in the margin of the long birth certificate, and at the bottom margin of the card version, is the 1^st debtor of every child born on this landmass. This means that your security (resources to live life) are to come from the land which is supposed to be managed for your benefit by the servant government/central bank and held in the Consolidated Revenue Fund (CRF) for the collective benefit of all men, women and children of the nation, and not for corporations.

To move you into a ‘creditor’ position in this trust arrangement with the purported servant government so that you owe all that you are and have to the government, they joined in the glossa (American Sign Language), mixed it with English, which grammatically destroys the whole document.

(Source: Romley Stewart, Hyphen-Glitch)

(Source: Romley Stewart, Justinian Deception)

Also, please let us know if any of our hyperlinks have stopped working so that we can fix them. Thank you.

People-United
people-united.ca

Subscribe now

Tip via Kofi/Stripe

E-transfer tips within Canada:
ADMIN-PU@proton.me

Series #2 PROPERTY THEFT Part 19 – Useless Crown Patents?

People-United Uncensored — Sun, 19 Jul 2026 12:01:13 GMT

Don’t Rely on Crown Patents to protect you from the UN

A Crown Patent (aka Letter Patent) is a legal document used to transfer land held by the federal or provincial government to a private owner. Dating back to the 1790s, Crown Patents are commonly the first transfer of title to land from the Crown/government to private ownership. This is known as the ‘root’ of the title when a title search on the property is completed.

But do remember that as a result of the Cestui que Trusts and Canon Laws (discussed in Part 1A) that our esteemed lawyers and other criminals operate under, all private property (in fact all land in the world) was unilaterally deemed an asset of a Trust controlled by the Crown/Vatican since 1303. Since the trustee Crown/Vatican has made itself ‘beneficiary’ through all sorts of underhanded tactics to reverse roles of Trustee/Beneficiary, what we regard as private property is in the same pool of assets as Crown land and therefore treated as public property. As this all happens in the background, we don’t realize that when we buy land, we are paying money for an asset appropriated centuries ago by means of Papal Bulls that ‘declared’ a Trust into existence, and the Vatican the Trustee.

When the Crown in Canada transfers land to a private owner, in fact it is transferring the use of the land that is held as an asset in the Cestui que Trust to a man or woman. We pay for an asset that is already ours as beneficiaries of the Trust, except that through the centuries the Trustee managed to switch positions in the Trust to become the beneficiary. As beneficiary and purported owner of all lands, the Vatican/Trustee gives us the right to use the land held in Trust that is rightfully ours. On top of that, they make us pay for the use of the land and that money flows back to the Trustee turned beneficiary (Vatican).

The Crown Patents establish who has interest in the subject property and place restrictions (most of which have been lifted) on those things that form part of the property that the government/Crown wished to keep for itself, such as certain species of trees, or certain minerals or to restrict certain activities, such as tree-cutting or mining, or to require the land be used strictly for agriculture.

CROWN PATENTS DO NOT MAKE ANY REFERENCE TO THE BUILDINGS ON THE PROPERTY OR THE SUBSEQUENT USES OF THE PROPERTY THAT CAN BE MADE (except for a small handful of restrictions that have not been lifted, which are rare). THEY DO NOT EXEMPT ANY LANDOWNER FROM MUNICIPAL BY-LAWS AND RESTRICTIONS.

Unfortunately, many people in the landowner rights movement have been advising property owners to obtain a certified copy of their Crown Patents from the Ministry of Natural Resources (cost roughly $50.00), to use as a sword in their defense against Municipal by-law and conservation authority tyranny. While it’s great to have the root to your property title, a Crown Patent is not the entire history, it’s just the beginning of a story about a parcel of land.

It is ESSENTIAL THAT PROPERTY OWNERS READ a legal article titled “Do Crown Patents insulate from Municipal compliance” by Jacob R.W. Damstra provided here, to understand the limitations of Crown Patents in that regard.

A Decision rendered on September 19, 2022 in the Ontario Superior Court, in Niagara Ontario, Court file # 2022 ONSC 5247 confirms the conclusions of the Damstra legal article. The government and its corporate agencies can literally take constructive possession of all trees on what the private property owner regarded as his ‘private property’. See the decision here.

Property owners in Ontario have been led to believe by some ‘gurus’ that the Crown Patents exempt them from all by-laws, and legislation regarding the use of their properties. That Superior Court case decision had to be a rude awakening.

Excerpted from the Court Decision regarding the issue of ownership of the trees on the property. Is a Bylaw void if it conflicts with the provisions of the Public Lands Act, Conveyancing and Law of Property Act or Real Property Limitations Act?

[64] The law is clear that all bylaws are subject to the general law of the realm and are subordinate to it and that any bylaws which are repugnant to or inconsistent with general provincial legislation are void and of no effect, or else superseded to the extent that the legislature has acted. The Law of Canadian Municipal Corporations, at paras 8.17, 63.16.
[65] The Applicant states that the Bylaw is subordinate to the provisions of the original Crown Patent. Because the Public Lands Act section 58(3) released all reservations of trees contained in that Crown Patent, the owner of the Property holds the trees in the Property in fee simple which is directly impacted by the Bylaw. The Bylaw accordingly frustrates the purpose of the Patent and the Public Lands Act without express authorization.
[66] The Applicant refers to section 15 of the Conveyancing and Law of Property Act which confirms that trees are incidents of land and when conveyed in fee simple, transfer all right, title and interest, inheritance and use to the grantee.
[67] Section 3(1) of the Real Property Limitations Act states that no entry, distress or action shall be made or brought on behalf of Her Majesty against any person for the recovery of or respecting any land or of land or for or concerning any revenues, rents, issues or profits, but within 60 years after the right to make such entry or distress or to bring such action has first accrued to Her Majesty. Originally this was recognized as the Nullum Tempus Act.
[68] I disagree with the Applicant’s position that the Bylaw which applies to the Property inhibits the owner’s right to use and to convey in fee simple incidents of the Property, i.e., the trees.
[69] The Region has not acquired any aspect of legal title to the Property which remains the owner’s private property although subject to the regulatory regime established by section 135 of the Municipal Act and the Bylaw.
[70] As indicated above, the court in Desmarais confirmed that the Crown patent does not limit governmental power to regulate land use.
[71] Furthermore, the Bylaw does not create and does not impact private property ownership in the Property nor does it create or remove Mr. Kaluzni’s interest therein. The Property is subject to the regulatory regime established by section 135 of the Municipal Act and the Bylaw regarding the use of the Property in so far as the destruction or injuring of trees thereon is concerned.

As you can see, the Court claims that a by-law that regulates how a property owner can use his trees is not impacting the rightful owner’s use of those trees. The court is a commercial court, uses legalese and can make any rule, and interpret any by-law whatever way the corporation that made the rules wish them to be applied.

A short list was compiled from the Dun & Bradstreet database of over 600 million for-profit businesses by searching for several business names. The searches provided lists of names which were further searched for their Dun & Bradstreet business number and business information. A few businesses of interest to Ontarians were searched and are listed below, strictly for illustrative purposes. (Many of the same businesses can be found listed on the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) website database as well where they generally are found under the heading of Government or a similar heading.) NOTE THE TITLE REFERENCE TO FOR PROFIT CORPORATIONS as found in Dun & Bradstreet:

For those who have the time and enjoy long hours of searches, Dun & Bradstreet’s database is here and SEC database called EDGAR is here. Many businesses go by several names, such as Government of Ontario and Ontario, Government of .

Naturally, just because a property owner has a patent or deed transferring a property to their ownership, it does not exempt the property owner from the law. But all this legislation the Judge refers to is not ‘law’; it is legal imposition by a for-profit corporation that violates all natural law.

The truly important point in this Decision, however, is that a municipality can impact severely the owner’s use of their property and act as though they own it, which is ‘constructive possession’. Our previous posts showed you the many ways municipalities have become lawless and corrupt.

In the corporate municipal world, there is no such thing as a man or woman and no such thing as human rights. Every individual and everything they think they own are in fact legally owned as corporate commodities. That’s why they have their own corporate laws and courts that use their own special language (legalese) with their own special legal dictionaries.

The Court in this Niagara case cleverly uses the term ‘legal title’, to distinguish from ‘absolute title’, because the legal title was stolen through distortion of the rightful owner’s given name. The all-capitalized name found in the ownership field of the for-profit corporate TERANET Parcel Register is a legal fiction created by TERANET and the real estate lawyers they collude with. Learn how this was done from our Series #2 PROPERTY THEFT Part 4 to the end of Part 5.

Having had his ‘absolute title’ erased by the Land Titles Act and replaced by a fictitious ‘legal title’ created by themselves, this rightful owner’s use of his trees are definitely impacted through the tree by-law restrictions. This is self-evident – he can’t cut down his own trees. His exclusive use of his private property has been abrogated by a mere by-law of a for-profit corporation.

Until the Canadian public and particularly Ontarians truly understand that they are living an illusion if they think for one minute that ‘private property’ means they are sovereign on their own lands, they will be slapped silly in the for-profit commercial courts just as these Applicants were.

The Courts use legalese to defeat all property owners seeking to establish their fundamental right to the exclusive use and control of the piece of land they paid for. If the municipality has any say over the trees on the Applicant’s land, then they constructively possess the trees and he doesn’t. There is no way around that legalese unless a proper form of government is instituted to end corporate government and its thefts.

[Note: This ‘doomed to fail’ Crown Patents case was appealed to no avail. It’s important that you don’t buy the ‘Crown-Patents-will-solve-all-your-problems’ rhetoric.]

***It is important to get your certified copy of the Crown Patent for your property AND the full title search and sub-search and a copy of EVERY document referenced in the Registry Abstracts because historical documents are being destroyed at an alarming pace by the private profiteering company, TERANET that is now in control of land titles in Ontario. The re-writing of history is essential to the success of the UN/NWO’s ‘new normal’.

Courts Promoting an Illusion

In RECENT years, the courts in Ontario have “consistently pointed to section 92(13) of the British North America Act, 1867, which allocates jurisdiction over “Property and Civil Rights” to the provinces, and concluded that this gives the provinces (and by extension, municipalities) broad powers to pass laws that affect property and associated rights.

The for-profit parent corporation that was active in 1867, made an agreement with the then subsidiary provincial corporations to divide up ‘business/commercial opportunities’ on the landmass in a certain way. This was called the Constitution Act, 1867. It has nothing to do with regulating humans and their private land. But they worked hard to make us believe that a corporation could regulate men, women and their private lands.

In fact, there is no mention of men, women or land in the Constitution Act, 1867 and the legal definition of Canada is:

Interpretations Act, 1985
Exclusive economic zone of Canada
2 (2.1) Every enactment that applies in respect of exploring or exploiting, conserving or managing natural resources, whether living or non-living, applies, in addition to its application to Canada, to the exclusive economic zone of Canada, unless a contrary intention is expressed in the enactment.
General definitions
35 (1) In every enactment,
Act, in respect of an Act of a legislature, includes a law of the Legislature of Yukon, of the Northwest Territories or for Nunavut; (loi provinciale)
Canada, for greater certainty, includes the internal waters of Canada and the territorial sea of Canada; (Canada)
Canadian waters includes the territorial sea of Canada and the internal waters of Canada; (eaux canadiennes)

We explained in previous posts that in law, the terms ‘includes’ and ‘including’ mean that the subject word ‘means’ whatever follows it and nothing else. Thus, Canada means inland and territorial (coastal) waters and not land. And ‘an act of a legislature’ means only an act in Yukon, NWT and Nunavut.

Clear your heads now – understand that Canada is an economic zone (commercial), has nothing to do with humans or land, and any enactments in the economic zone called Canada apply only to 3 territories. The reason that the corporation that does business in the economic zone called Canada can only regulate 3 territories is because the other provinces rejected the idea of federating in 1867. You’ll learn more about this in our upcoming CONSTITUTION-CHARTER FRAUD series.

While there are two things wrong with the basis of these RECENT decisions about who has exclusive authority over private property, including structures and trees, the fact remains that the decisions are intended to facilitate goals of the UN to end private property ownership by 2030 and are RECENT for that reason.

First, upon reading our CONSTITUTION/CHARTER FRAUD series, you will know that the British North America Act was never agreed to …it was a fraudulent document put forth by John A. MacDonald as having been agreed to by the then 4 provinces.

Secondly, until the leading case eroding property rights in 2012 occurred, the Supreme Court of Canada and other courts held that private property rights were sacrosanct (inviolable). Both the lower court and the Appellate Court in the Mackie case knew full well that they were relying on a provision in a Statute (BNA Act) that did not exist. Further, even if the BNA did exist, it did not say anything about the corporation masquerading as government having any authority to regulate private property…the government was supposed to be a ‘service’ provider, not a thief. Canada is an economic zone, not a nation.

Both courts in Mackie also knew that the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR) that was binding on all levels of government, prohibited the deprivation of anyone’s means of subsistence or interference with private property…yet, they conveniently ignored all law to impose UN policy, pointing to the real issues with private property violations being the UN using the provision to make the UN Charter supreme.

The Damstra article linked earlier summarizes R. v. Mackie, showing that once conservation authorities started to expropriate land, it gave itself the power to essentially take constructive possession of private land by restricting the use of the land. This was a test case for the UN and the UN, through its government shills, won the day.

To see how a municipality restricts the use of land to then fully control it without paying compensation for what amounts to an expropriation, see the story of a law-biding senior wholly terrorized by the City of Belleville, Intact Public Entities insurance and the lawyers.

As lawyer Damstra summarized, what you presume are property rights are not if ‘constitutional law’ is considered. He does not mention that there is no Constitution! Or that the only constitution is a corporate document.

Thus, since 2012, everything that was, was no longer. Crown Patents or no Crown Patents, municipalities and conservation authorities can impose restrictions as they wish, not because it is lawful, but because they can use force. In all countries, corporations have taken over all aspects of life.

There is no dispute anywhere by anyone of the value of the original legal title as expressed in a Crown Patent. Why people think there is, is founded in the fact they do not understand the difference between legal title holder, equitable title holder, Absolute Title holder and exclusive owner and how all of those titles were stolen by a corporation called TERANET. Therefore they are focusing on the wrong thing.

Be sure to also check out our UN INVASION of CANADA – ‘Peace Bait’ series (starting here), our MUNICIPAL FRAUD newsletters (starting here) and our PUBLIC-PRIVATE PARTNERSHIP RACKETS series (starting here). This PROPERTY THEFT series started here.

Also, please let us know if any of our hyperlinks have stopped working so that we can fix them. Thank you.

People-United
people-united.ca

Subscribe now

Tip via Kofi/Stripe

E-transfer tips within Canada:
ADMIN-PU@proton.me

Series #2 PROPERTY THEFT Part 18B UNDRIP-a destabilizing weapon

People-United Uncensored — Thu, 16 Jul 2026 12:01:51 GMT

UNDRIP: A foreign, destabilizing weapon against humanity

The Aboriginal (aka Indigenous) peoples need to see they are being used for the World Economic Forum’s (WEF) agenda of “You will own nothing and be happy” by 2030.

The wicked ones care not about the poor, the homeless, the hungry, the depressed, or the injured; all they care about is power, control, and upsetting the higher divine nature of man.

With UNDRIP being UN-based, this means the United Nations becomes the banker, the judge and the jury -- the group that holds the property. Over the past 2 years, on many reserves, new offices have been built and UN-trained entities are connecting with Indians to manage the transition.

Most Indian reserves are federally-owned, operated and funded – with taxpayer dollars. The UN is not just dealing with Indian peoples, the Canadian federal government is operating as the UN’s lackey, creating a dangerous situation for all.

Canadians LOST their private Land Rights, starting in Vancouver. This initiative is going on worldwide, including in the USA, New Zealand and other western democracies through government adoption of UNDRIP. It is the UN’s destabilizing, neutron bomb, designed to destroy the concept of private property, to cause unrest between Indian tribes and non-Indians, and so much more.

If you have something that another person doesn’t have, the UN claims you are at fault because you have it; the other person is not at fault because he doesn’t bother to attain it. There are some who can’t attain it for themselves, and of course, they need the helping hand of society, but this need to turn over everything you have worked for to those who have chosen to waste their lives is typical social doctrine of the Roman Catholic Church, a political force that has been behind communists and funded both sides of every war for almost 2,000 years. See our upcoming RELIGION FRAUD series for details.

What happened to:

“Give a man a fish, he will be hungry again tomorrow; teach him to catch fish and he will be richer all his life.”
~ M. Loane 1911

This UNDRIP will allow even those from 3^rd world countries to say they are indigenous and claim land. There is no specificity as to where an individual can be from to claim indigenous status in a different country.

As far as the UN is concerned, there are no borders, just one big world governed by them, so if you live in China, you can claim indigenous status in Canada, because there is no definition as to what indigenous status means or how it is confirmed.

Mohawk policy analyst, Russ Diabo explains here the actions of the fake Canadian government to terminate land claims through legislation and the Trudeau Liberal’s Indigenous Rights Framework (nicknamed White Paper 2.0). You know this is a UN framework because the UN put the undefined term ‘Indigenous’ in the title.

Russell Diabo believes that current First Nation–government relations are guided by ongoing ‘termination’ policies against Indigenous peoples in Canada. Diabo, of the Mohawk Nation at Kahnawake, explained the history of this process in his talk on July 25 at the University of New Brunswick in Fredericton and the video provided is an excerpt from his explanations. See Diabo’s article here (archived here), where he shows that band-by-band, Indians are being terminated.

Of course, once you terminate a person’s identity and give them a new identity, their future is yours. The UN has accomplished this by removing the identity of a boy or girl and giving them a new identity – one of 79 + undefined genders. Similarly with Indian Tribes and People. They have agreed to give up their thousands of years of identity as ‘Indians’ to be renamed as undefined ‘Indigenous’.

Just as the UN has used its social justice shills to remove the child as part of the ‘family’, to instead be part of the LGBTQP+++ family, their identity as a member of their original family was also extinguished and replaced.

[cm: UNDRIP is the first legislation I’ve seen that actually refers to men, women, children.]

Similarly, with Indian Tribes and People: their bands and family units are being replaced by ‘municipalities’ and government opinion and policies. Their lands are no longer ‘tribal lands’, but UN municipalities controlled under the UNDRIP that gives the UN Charter the power over all ‘Indian’ (aka Indigenous) affairs.”

“The federal Liberal party’s communications strategy is guided by tactics developed by consultants for the Trudeau Sr. government called ‘SWAT’ – Strategic Words And Tactics.
Trudeau Jr. used a similar approach during the 2015 federal Liberal election campaign. “The Liberals say things like nation-to-nation, but they mean things different from what our people mean by those terms.”
The Trudeau government is trying to frame things in the media like they’re trying to help us, so when he attacks our rights and we stand up, the public thinks we’re ungrateful and isn’t on our side. That’s SWAT.”

~Russ Diabo, July 25, 2019

In 1995, the government came up with the Inherent Right POLICY where they unilaterally defined the right to self-government. That is, they were intended to convert Indian Bands into municipal governments.

This was part of Justin Trudeau’s National Reconciliation Plan to institute a 4^th level of government: Indian governments were now to be the 4^th level of government in Canada in 2016.

Land Claims Policies from the Pierre Trudeau days are still being implemented by Justin Trudeau/UN today. In fact, it was former PM Jean Chretien who decided the bands would be redefined as ‘municipalities’ and a 4^th level of government, and he intended to assimilate the bands into the Canadian property and taxation system, using the First Nations Land Management Act, and the First Nations Fiscal Management Act.

Assimilating bands and reserves into the Canadian Corporate system now under the control of the United Nation’s world government apparatus (since 1985) as a 4^th level of Canadian government, is being done by Liberals, in pieces through legislation:

Bill C96 abolishes the Indian Act and replaces it with the Department of Indian Services and the Department of Crown-Indigenous Affairs.

Other pieces of legislation include the Child Welfare and Language laws.
Bill C96 was inserted into a huge Omnibus Bill to create the new law that will terminate all First Nations bands and reservations and dissolve the Department of Indian Affairs.

All these new laws are being passed under the color of law, are fake legislation and null and void because as you learn in the CONSTITUTION-CHARTER FRAUD series, there is no federal government, no confederation, no Constitution, no Charter.

The reason this is all being imposed on the Indian Tribes, bands and reservations is because the corporate Indian Act instituted the practice of replacing the true Hereditary Chiefs with ‘elected chiefs’ that could then be controlled by the government which is under globalist control, specifically the UNELECTED corporation, the United Nations and UNDRIP (United Nations Declaration On The Rights Of Indigenous Peoples) (archived here).

Left out of this warp-speed process, with no consultation whatsoever (archived here), as they always are, were Aboriginal rights holders—the actual Aboriginal Peoples from across the country. This is consistent with having their real names and titles extinguished by the UN, their true names and titles being Tribal People, Indian Tribes and Indians. The elected Chiefs (aka UN shills) of course were at the table, but not the Indian people.

They were not consulted or even shown a draft before the Bill was tabled. The Trudeau government rushed Bill C-15 through the House of Commons in breakneck speed when it resumed in January 2021.

Unfortunately, good decent Indian lands advocates such as Russ Diabo had been 100% suckered into believing that the UNDRIP fully implemented their rights, when it fact, the UNDRIP fully ends Indian sovereignty and self-determination.

Diabo and other Indian advocates in their early advocacy fell for the UN’s ‘rights’ bait and suggested the full implementation of UNDRIP was necessary to protect their culture. By 2020, that view changed.

By 2021, among his conclusions for not supporting UNDRIP were the obvious: (Note: he has not caught onto the UN’s elimination of identity by referring, not to Indians, but to undefined Indigenous)

The Assembly of First Nations (AFN) is not the legitimate representative of “Indigenous rights holders—the actual Indigenous Peoples from across the country”
The preamble is in fact not legally binding so courts will focus on the main deeply flawed sections one to seven
Bill C-15 will be used by the government of Canada to reinforce the status quo because the Bill makes it clear that existing national laws—many of which violate Indigenous rights—will prevail over UNDRIP;
The main sections of Bill C-15, particularly section 2, maintain the common law interpretation of section 35(1) and section 35(2) of the Constitution Act, 1982, which is heavily based on the colonial Doctrine of Discovery, which strips Indigenous people of their land ownership and land rights;
The primacy of the debunked Doctrine of Discovery means Canadian courts will continue to adjudicate using existing case law based on section 35 of the fictitious Constitution Act, 1982, and these rulings have caused major harm to the daily life for Indigenous Peoples and Nations including:
- The imposition of Crown sovereignty over Indigenous peoples, including self-government rights;
- Disregarding Indigenous laws and legal traditions;
- Establishing that the Crown has “ultimate title” to land
- The burden of proof imposed on Indigenous Peoples and Nations to establish their rights in Canadian courts;
- The ability for the Crown to infringe Aboriginal rights based on the “Sparrow test” that allows infringement of Aboriginal rights under all sorts of circumstances;
- The erosion of the duty to consult and accommodate to nothing more than a procedural right that is reviewable based on administrative law principles.

If Bill C-15 becomes law, Diabo had warned, (which it did in 2023), all 46 Articles of the UN declaration will be interpreted and implemented through the colonial Canadian constitutional framework, instead of respecting international law regarding the rights of Indigenous Peoples.

What Diabo did not realize was the day he and his brothers and sisters allowed the United Nations to reduce them to undefined ‘indigenous’ persons, they had already lost their identity and would go down in history as ‘undefined’ and melded into the world government’s single society.

In fact, the federal ‘Inherent Right’ policy states “The inherent right of self-government does not include a right of sovereignty in the international law sense…implementation of self-government should enhance the participation of Aboriginal peoples in the Canadian federation [as fourth level “Indigenous governments”]” [emphasis added].

So UNDRIP, Diabo asserted, will be used to justify the removal of Indigenous right to self-determination and with that all of the other promised rights of the UNDRIP – regarding restoration of stolen lands, territories and resources, or restitution for stolen lands, and the articles requiring Free, Prior Informed Consent for developments on lands of Indigenous Peoples would be meaningless.

In other words, by placing UNDRIP beneath existing Canadian law, they domesticate it out of existence.

Sadly, Diabo is yet to learn that there is and was never a ‘Canadian Law’ and that in fact the UN’s World Government Law has been in place in Canada since 1985. Moreover, the UNDRIP binds Indians to the UN Charter, which is the communist manifesto in trick language!

Clan Mothers and Hereditary Chiefs Were Not Fooled

The Clan Mothers and Hereditary Chiefs have not fallen for it. But as happened with the pushing through of the UN Migration Pact, they were ignored. UNDRIP passed because the elected, now former, Chief of the First Nations National Assembly, lawyer and politician, Perry Bellegarde, (archived here) and other ‘elected’ chiefs have pushed it through, under the pretext that this UN monstrosity will protect the rights of his people.

Please see a November 2022 Liberti video interview with Ron Vaillant titled ‘The most important untold story in the World’, and be shocked at how diabolical this UNDRIP is. We were unable to save the video, thus we apologize for any inconvenience if the link to the interview is broken.

See a good analysis (archived here) of just what this UNDRIP scheme is about in the awesome December 2022 edition of Druthers.

After the imposition of the Indian Act, the United Nations UNDRIP is the worst possible thing that can happen to unceded First Nations lands. They couldn’t steal them any other way, so they used an Indian lawyer (fictitious Chief) to sucker all tribes into agreeing to this treaty. The UN succeeded in manufacturing consent to insert itself into Canadian affairs by making any issue with Indian lands a UN issue and subject to the UN Charter.
This is a foreign takeover of First Nations land by first redefining the rightful owners as undefined ‘indigenous’, then redefining the society itself as undefined ‘indigenous’, and redefining customs and traditions of Tribal People as part of a global ‘rights’ treaty.
Nowhere is ‘Indigenous’ defined…it can be anyone from any country. The UN works toward destroying all borders and national sovereignty. This treaty will allow even those from 3rd world countries to say they are indigenous and claim land. There is no specificity as to where an individual can be from to claim indigenous status in a different country.
As far as the UN is concerned, there are no borders, just one big world, so if you live in China, you can claim indigenous status, with no definition as to what indigenous status means or how it is confirmed.
It’s awful and the Clan Mothers and Hereditary Chiefs have not fallen for it. But like the UN Migration Pact, they were ignored and this was passed as though law.

However, there is yet another wrinkle stemming from the misunderstanding about just what the Indian Act really meant.

According to Hymie Rubenstein, (archived here) a retired professor of anthropology at the University of Manitoba, accompanying reports (archived here) written by the Indian treaty Commissioners, such as Treaty 8 made with several Western Canada tribes, even stipulated that THERE IS NO PRIVATE PROPERTY OWNERSHIP IN CANADA:

“… whether the treaty was made [signed by the Indian] or not, they were subject to the law, bound to obey it, and liable for any infringement of it. We pointed out that the law was made for the protection of all, and must be respected by all the inhabitants of the country, irrespective of colour or origin.”

(source: Who owns Canada? Hymie Rubenstein)

Lethal inter-tribal warfare was chronic on the Prairies prior to the British colonial pacification that the treaties formalized. Stated Hymie Rubenstein in ‘Who Owns Canada?’:

“Newly invented indigenous land claims also need to acknowledge that despite the practical existence in law and fact of fee simple land ownership, all of Canada, including the treaty lands of the indigenous peoples, has theoretically belonged to the British Crown since the days of John Cabot:
“The land of Canada is solely owned by Queen Elizabeth II who is also the head of state…. The Canadian Act has no provision for any Canadian to own physical land in Canada. Canadians can only own an interest in an estate.”
Regardless of what a bunch of activist lawyers-turned-Supreme Court-judges have opined, there is no unceded Indigenous land in Canada, not one square inch.”

About the Doctrine of Discovery that Aboriginal groups and their advocates seem to rely on to claim that most of the Canadian landmass belongs to the First Nations, Rubenstein states this:

“There has been a growing chorus of hyperbolic cries that Pope Francis renounce this “doctrine of discovery” when he visits Canada in late July. Similar calls have come from the Anglican Church of Canada, Assembly of First Nations, Truth and Reconciliation Commission of Canada, and various indigenous leaders and activists.
The motives behind this anti-conquest, anti-colonization movement are a desire for the return of indigenous lands, more indigenous sovereignty, and financial reparations for the loss of both.
All three are based on shaky grounds. The roaming bands of foragers composing most pre-contact peoples occupied constantly shifting territories. Nor did they possess sovereign nationhood based on unique languages and cultures. As for reparations, they have been paid in the tens of billions since Confederation in 1867.
The use of the term doctrine of discovery is itself questionable because it was never a term used to justify the age-old seizure or colonization of populated territories. Instead, there were papal bulls beginning in 1436 awarding newly conquered non-Christian territories to one European crown or another to avoid fights over the same lands.” Hymie Rubenstein, Who Owns Canada

BUT, and there is always a but, the problem is that while Queen Elizabeth II might have claimed that her family ‘conquered’ the landmass Canada, the fact is that she is 100% fictitious and her coronation was even more so.

Moreover, Queen Victoria before her had already signed the Statute of Westminster, 1931, that ended colonization of the provinces and gave them the opportunity to install a constitutional republic WITH PRIVATE PROPERTY RIGHTS if they wanted them. (See our upcoming CONSITUTION-CHARTER FRAUD series for details.)

Practically everything about the British Royals is fictitious and fraudulent.

UNDRIP now used to steal all BC lands for UN-controlled Aboriginal Industry – including private property

The Communist/Socialist NDP and Aboriginal Industry fraudsters working for the United Nations to bring all British Columbia under the full control of the UN World Government -- and to end all private property ownership by using fraudulent legislation to ‘reconcile’ the fraudulent aboriginal land claims -- is threatening the very existence of British Columbia in 2024.

You can learn much more about the elite Aboriginal Industry fraudsters carving up Canada for the UN/WEF from the ABORIGINAL INDUSTRY FRAUD series. ALL private property across Canada is a target.

The NDP were previously named the Socialist Party and have always been an arm of the United Nations tasked with turning every province communist and under World Government control -- which means no one owns anything, your stuff is everyone else’s, even if you worked for it.

In September 2024, the political party system was used to put the NDP back into power by eliminating an ‘opposing’ party. With that new ‘power’ the NDP is readied to operate without a mandate to transform BC into yet another UN World Government-controlled landmass by passing legislation that literally steals private property and turns it over to the fraudsters in the Aboriginal land claims industry and its government shills.

Once returned to power, the NDP acted as if it had earned a mandate from you, the public, to continue with and fully implement its dismantling of this province based on UNDRIP.

**** The NDP in Ontario transferred the entire land registry system of Ontario to private control using 2 Muslim ‘investors’ and a Canadian billionaire. Now not a single property title is in the given name of the rightful owner, but instead is in the name of a fictitious legal entity that looks like the given name. This is an NDP/UN World Government legal slight-of-hand that stole all private property in one fell swoop … see PROPERTY THEFT started at Part 4 to learn how it was done.

In BC, the Aboriginals are used as the thieving power doing the dirty work for the UN.

The land claims are untrue, many of the tribes are fake tribes, and especially, the Indians Residential School abuse allegations are proven to be nothing more than a recent fraud designed to extort more tax dollars from Canadians and to demand ‘reconciliation’ for things that never happened.

The Elected Chiefs displaced Heritage Chiefs and Clan Mothers and were and continue to be responsible for the deprivation that Indians have and continue to face, as Chiefs demand power and the ‘right’ to abuse that power over the reservations.

Elected Chiefs demanded that the government build residential Indian schools, demanded that the government keep them open long after the government wanted to replace them with in-community schools, demanded recognition of fake Indians (Pretendians) and fake tribes that are now insisting they ‘own’ land Canadians rightful own. They demand to have a separate government, criminal justice system and sentencing protocol, while being permitted to avoid sales taxation and run criminal enterprises from the reservations.

Geoffrey S. Moyse KC is a retired senior lawyer who served as legal counsel to the Province of BC, advising six successive governments on Aboriginal law over 30 years. He is warning about the NDP’s theft of Crown and private lands and using fraud to turn them over to the UN under the pretext of ‘Indigenous reconciliation’.

Here is what is going on in BC (archived here) as of September 15^th, 2024, expanding across Canada, mostly kept secret by the NDP that is upending and remaking the British Columbia land base and British Columbia society in the name of Indigenous “reconciliation”, even though the reconciliation demanded is based on wholesale fraud:

A new and entirely radical reconciliation agenda that has been deliberately hidden from the general public.
A rogue provincial government (NDP)is unilaterally claiming to legislate Aboriginal title to claimed Indigenous territories (100% of BC) even though in two BC court declarations of Aboriginal title to date only 5% or less of the landmass is involved.
Future unilateral provincial “recognition” of territorial Aboriginal title will utilize the Haida Gwaii 100% “template”. This ‘template’ erases Crown land throughout the province, erases all reference to Canadian law, and ends all involvement of the federal government. In other words, the NDP is handing all of BC to Aboriginal Elected Chiefs to run their own nation, after getting $1 Trillion from the Canadian Taxpayer, and despite the treaties of the past being very clear that Indians never owned all the land.
The NDP is re-writing history and forcing parents to teach their children that they should not refer to themselves as British Columbians, in case it offends the Aboriginal Industry frauds working for the United Nations. And because some Aboriginals believe the province to be historically illegitimate, the pioneers are believed to be ‘settlers’ or ‘illegal occupiers’. History shows that not only have these same Aboriginals been milking the Canadian taxpayer for decades, but had it not been for the ‘settlers’ and their law-based system, the Indians themselves would have been fully exterminated by the larger tribes.
As though this NDP political party working for the United Nations World Government owns the landmass, it is preparing to transfer the entire provincial public land base (e.g. Crown land) into Aboriginal title lands under the ownership and control of less than 6% of the provincial population, who will not be elected by anyone outside of their internal communities. This is part of the UNDRIP promise to ‘indigenous’ peoples – they can simply take whatever they want if they feel it belonged to their ancestors in the past.
Senior government officials have confirmed that Crown lands will no longer exist at all in BC within the next few years. In other words, the Indians have used our money to steal our land and set up their own ‘nation’.
The NDP/UN is pretending to protect private lands from the legal effects of their Aboriginal title declarations – of course they are doing this by using legal THEORIES, without any discussion with the public or private landowners. The attitude is that because fraudsters in the Aboriginal community, funded and directed by the United Nations ‘say’ the land belongs to them, they have a right to steal it, including everything on it. EVERYTHING the UN does is legitimatized by the use of ‘theories’…COVID theory, virus theory, climate change theory, critical race theory, gender theory and the long list goes on, and all resulting in social engineering in the vision of one world government. By 2026, the Cowichan Decision has proven that private property is in grave danger.
The public, historical evidence, legal treaties and Canadian laws are being effectively excluded from the Indigenous ‘reconciliation’ agenda in this province, ensuring that it is not ‘reconciliation’ but grand theft and fraud.

Reconciliation Now Means Orderly Transition of Private Lands to Indian Tribes

An August 2025 landmark ruling (Cowichan Decision) from the B.C. Supreme Court declared existing title to private property to be “defective and invalid” – thus taking away established property rights. This is precedent-setting and such a theft of private lands across BC and Canada is expected to go across Canada.

This means that private property rights are now erased by Aboriginal land rights, whenever they choose to make a land claim. This has already been seen as First Nations have been forcing cities to be renamed, where Indigenous ‘regions’ have been established.

Justice Barbara Young ruled that 800 acres in Richmond, BC – including industrial property owned and managed by different levels of government as well as privately held land – “have established Aboriginal title” and thus rightfully belong to the Cowichan Tribes.

Other local First Nations, including the Musquem Indian Band and Tsawwassen First Nations, are upset by the ruling as they also claim title to this land. This is what the LAND BACK activists have been calling for. This is why they force us to listen to “land acknowledgements.”

The Cowichan Band wanted to grab this land in Richmond, BC and to do so without private property owners knowing that this is what their case in Supreme Court of British Columbia was about. The court obliged and it was not until late October 2025 that most Richmond, BC private landowners learned that this band managed to get the court to give them ‘title’ to the land.

The private property owners were deliberately kept in the dark until August 7, 2025, by the band, the government and the court for over 8 years about the fact that their fee simple titles had been affected in the most serious way possible by a declaration by the court of Aboriginal title over their properties.

Essential Read: article here by investigative reporter Nina Green, published by Woke Watch Canada, November 5, 2025.

All private and Crown lands in BC are up for grabs by whatever tribe claims they own title to the land. This United Nations scheme is destined to sweep across Canada and was introduced by the obnoxious Land Acknowledgements we were all subjected to.

This is what the LAND BACK activists (originating in the US) have been calling for and why they force us to listen to “land acknowledgements.” The Cowichan Tribes believe Canada is an illegitimate country, that Canadians are mere “settlers” and that the land belongs to the various First Nations tribes that make competing claims.

This is a slippery slope towards the disintegration of our country.

The judge in this case even stated that “an orderly transition of the land is in keeping with the principle of reconciliation.” Reconciliation therefore means the legalized theft of private property by those who have no legal title to property.

And they have legal precedent, thanks to this insane court ruling. In this video, journalist Candice Malcolm interviews B.C. Conservative Leader John Rustad to discuss this ruling and what it means for British Columbia and eventually all of Canada, specifically private property owners.

John Rustad has called for an urgent appeal of this ruling, stating that it threatens private property and investment into B.C.

This is clearly the invasion of UN through legislatures: the UN is a private foreign corporation. Its declaration has been made law. It is using Indians to steal property Canadians paid for. This ruling has erased all private property rights in Canada.

Did you know that the United Nations has designated 50% of the landmass of each province will be off-use to humans in 4 years?

In this news report by WakeUPCanada Channel News, written and researched by Gloria Karol, you can get a summary of what Canadian lands are being stolen by this private, criminal, globalist corporation. Because the news report is likely to be censored, you can also find it here.

They have already accomplished this as Parks Canada and even part of Vancouver have been designated Aboriginal Title lands, prohibited to all but Indigenous individuals, a situation resulting from the BC Supreme Court Decision that makes Aboriginal Land Rights superior to Private Property Rights. See the Aboriginal Industry Fraud Series for greater details.

Be sure to also check out our UN INVASION of CANADA – ‘Peace Bait’ series (starting here), our MUNICIPAL FRAUD newsletters (starting here) and our PUBLIC-PRIVATE PARTNERSHIP RACKETS series (starting here).
This PROPERTY THEFT series started here.

Also, please let us know if any of our hyperlinks have stopped working so that we can fix them. Thank you.

People-United
people-united.ca

Subscribe now

Tip via Kofi/Stripe

E-transfer tips within Canada:
ADMIN-PU@proton.me

Series #2 PROPERTY THEFT Part 18A - Aboriginal Land Grab of Private Property

People-United Uncensored — Sun, 12 Jul 2026 12:02:12 GMT

The Shocking Truth about First Nations Lands

As with every other agenda of the UN/Canadian government, it is using division and scare-mongering to pit some Canadians against others, knowing in the end that all will lose everything.

Read this in conjunction with our upcoming ABORIGINAL INDUSTRY FRAUD Series, which will provide extensive details and sources.

The last nail in the Canadian property ownership coffin is the taking of private lands by duping the public about who inhabited these lands, how much of the land was actually inhabited by Canadian Indians and by using corrupt elected Chiefs to harm their own people.

Across Canada, and particularly in BC and Manitoba, the government is handing Indians and ‘Pretendians’ private lands as part of an Indigenous ‘reconciliation’ scam. Indigenous is an undefined, UN term designed to erase the true race of Indians, Inuits and other pure race individuals to blend them into a nice big pool of globalist citizens with no nation, no culture and no race.

We say that ‘indigenous’ is undefined because it is misleadingly defined by the UN that pretends to adopt the definition of the aboriginal peoples of Canada in subsection 35(2) of the Constitution Act, 1982 , s. 35(2) that states ‘In this Act, aboriginal peoples of Canada includes the Indian, Inuit and Métis peoples of Canada.‘ The term ‘includes’ as you learned from our previous posts means ‘means’. Thus in the Constitution Act, 1982, ‘aboriginal peoples of Canada means the Indian, Inuit, and Métis peoples of Canada’ and no others.

But the UNDRIP Act curiously states that the definition of indigenous is assigned by the Constitutional Act, 1982, which came 25 years before the UNDRIP, so this definition of ‘Indigenous’ in UNDRIP is bizarre: ‘Indigenous peoples has the meaning assigned by the definition aboriginal peoples of Canada in subsection 35(2) of the Constitution Act, 1982 .’

‘Indigenous peoples’ cannot have the meaning assigned by the definition aboriginal peoples of Canada in the Constitution Act, 1982 since the meaning in the Act did not define indigenous. IF the criminal United Nations were not trying to trick the public, would they not just say “the definition of ‘indigenous’ is the same as that of Aboriginal as defined in the Constitution Act, which is ‘aboriginal peoples of Canada includes the Indian, Inuit and Métis peoples of Canada.‘ Why the word salad instead of clear definition, except that they would rely on us to (a) not read the fictitious Constitution Act and (b) presume that the twisted definition of ‘indigenous’ means the same as the 25-year old definition of ‘Aboriginal’.

However, if it had been the intention of the UN to narrow the definition to those 3 groups, it could have simply remained consistent with domestic laws and historical records and called them Aboriginals. But the ploy was to allow anyone and everyone to call themselves Indigenous, even if they don’t meet the definition of Aboriginal. So we have over 10,000 people identifying as Indigenous, who are not remotely Aboriginal…something the UN wanted all along. That is why People-United is stating the term is undefined…because it is a replacement for the term Aboriginal, intended to allow all manner of people to self-identify as ‘indigenous’.

The definition of Aboriginal does not specify part Indian other than Métis, or to part Inuit, thus in law the restrictive term ‘includes’ excludes those with only part Indian or part Inuit lineage shared with other than French, such as ½ Indian and ½ Latino. This creates a must larger pool of ‘Aboriginals’ than what most Canadians consider true Aboriginals, but fits in nicely with the United Nation’s strategy of removing races and pooling everyone into its world government apparatus.

Another point: the Constitution Act, 1982 is just as fictitious and a fraud as the Constitution Act, 1867 and you learn why in our upcoming Series #3 CONSTITUTION-CHARTER FRAUD.

This land grab is easy, since the courts no longer require ‘evidence’ of land ownership or even use – fabricated ‘witness’ testimony will do just fine to steal land from those who worked and developed it. Nor does anyone have to prove they are even part of the lineage of the tribe grabbing the land.

IT IS ESSENTIAL THAT YOU LEARN THE TRUTH ABOUT THE INDIGENOUS (Aboriginal) INDUSTRY RUN BY UN-CONTROLLED LAWYERS by visiting our upcoming LEGAL FRAUD, VICTIM INDUSTRY and ABORIGINAL INDUSTRY FRAUD Series.

For example, in 1982, the Canadian government adopted the legal term “Aboriginal peoples of Canada” in the fake Constitution Act, referring to the Indian, Inuit and Métis peoples of Canada.

Despite Hereditary Chiefs and Clan Mothers wanting to keep their true names -- Tribal people and Indians --the term Aboriginal increased in popularity in the ’80s and ’90s.

Then, just as the identity of boys and girls were eliminated with the imposition of the ‘gender fluid’ ideology, the terms ‘Indians and Tribal Peoples’ were also discarded through UN-controlled media social engineering.

Indigenous is not a term chosen by Indians, Metis or mix-raced groups – it was entirely generated by the corrupt, divisive and anti-Western corporation United Nations and promoted by the CBC shill journalists – as pointed out here.

And that UN-driven name change launched a whole new victim industry – the Aboriginal Industry.

Heavily involved in promoting this lucrative new Aboriginal Industry and the entire dissolution of the correct terms for Indians and Tribal People, was and continues to be the CBC. See its dirty so-called journalism tricks (archived here). The article is titled ‘What’s in a Name: end race-based laws’ and makes great points about how fraudsters are stealing land they claim they ‘owned’, when ‘owning’ land was against their beliefs.

Canadian Indians, Metis and mix-raced Canadians are NOT indigenous to Canada. They are, as proven by DNA testing, indigenous to Siberia and Mongolia.

‘The Giveaway Continues’ (archived here) (Stswecem’cXget’tem ‘First Nation’ (SXFN) (Canoe Creek-Dog Creek)) Jan. 24, 2023.

“The government is now starting to turn private land over to Aboriginal tribes – something they promised would never happen.
“P.S. They can’t ever be honest about the cost of so-called ‘reconciliation’. How do we know this land wasn’t originally stolen from another tribe?
“Nearly 7,800 hectares of ranch lands, along with grazing licences for 56,000 hectares of land, are being ‘returned’ to Stswecem’cXget’tem ‘First Nation’ (SXFN) (Canoe Creek-Dog Creek) -- a ‘nation’ of 810 people -- as part of treaty negotiations with the Northern Secwepemc teQelmucw (NstQ). The ‘Northern Shuswap Tribal Council’ is a lobbying organization.”

Note: that these ‘Tribal Councils’ are lobby organizations…just corporations organized to bribe and threaten the government. While they get special access to our bureaucrats and politicians, the public who pays the tab are told to be quiet, ask no questions and go along (otherwise you’ll be called ‘racists’ by their grifters).

PUBLIC Provincial parks are supposed to be for ALL people, especially the taxpayers who fund their maintenance! Now they are being closed to all but Indians/Aboriginals (archived here).

See Public isn’t Public Anymore (archived here) to learn how Canadians have paid hefty taxes to buy and maintain these public parks and suddenly, by stealth, Indians have appropriated them for themselves, not having paid a cent in taxes, ever!

Despite what mainstream media, left-wing politicians and other woke people want you to believe, the Aboriginals were not all master stewards of the land and most of the land acknowledgements we hear various politicians and bureaucrats rattle off are based on grossly faulty information.

“Unceded” land is land not covered by treaty!
The term does not mean ‘land not given up by a Tribe’.

When any Chief claims that they are within their rights to claim ‘unceded’ lands for themselves, they are suggesting that they used the land but never gave it up. In fact, that is a misrepresentation – they are claiming land that was never a focus of any treaty.

Please read some examples of the deliberate misrepresentation of information (archived here) advanced by the UN-controlled ‘elected’ Chiefs and the corrupt band councils about what lands they did and did not sell or trade.

The gift that keeps on giving: Land Acknowledgements. This nonsense is akin to a situation where one of us sold the house and then forced the next owner to recite every morning that this house was originally ours. Unfortunately, even asking the question “why are we doing this?” (or asking any other question, for that matter) attracts the ‘racist’ and ‘denier’ labels and problems because the freedom of speech is now as elusive as proof all the land claims are legitimate.

Once this fake history, the victimhood and the UN were fully in play, the UN swooped in with their ‘solution – the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous People (UNDRIP). UNDRIP is a declaration of a private corporation and has no authority over sovereign nations and people – until our communist corporation makes it domestic law.

In 2024, GREY AND BRUCE COUNTIES in Ontario ARE BEING SUED FOR $80 billion by elected Chiefs. THEY WANT UNDERWATER LAND RIGHTS TO INCLUDE PARTS OF LAKE HURON.

There are many such attempts by tribal peoples to recover lands they claim were theirs, but none will tell you the true facts of who owned what, who used what and who paid to develop what.

Certainly, many of us are confused about the treaties that are out there and how they are used or misused.

If you were wondering why Canadian Indians/natives always want an inquiry into anything and everything they can dream up, just think of free hotel stays, free food and airfares as a starting point.

Staggering Truths And Historical Facts Re: First Nations Peoples (archived here) by Don Matheson, published Feb 3, 2021 shares some very valuable facts:

Since 1946 the Canadian Government has spent $3,300,000,000,000.00 - that is 3.3 TRILLION on Indian Affairs with NO RETURN on the investment.
This should be reading material for ALL Canadians. This article is absolutely correct. Some very interesting statistics for each individual to consider but anyone with a background [in Tribal matters] knows this to be true already! The fact is that the bleeding hearts and vote mongering Politicians don’t want the general public to know this, so let’s spread it around!!
Judging from an article in The Calgary Sun entitled “Enough is Enough”, a National Inquiry into missing and murdered aboriginal women is NOT what needs to be done and Harper was right in not pursuing this time wasting expensive suggestion supported by both the NDP and Liberals
Chief Ronald Morin of the Enoch band west of Edmonton is paid $750,000.00 per year by the federal government (YOU). He spends winters at his winter home in Las Vegas, 4 car garage & swimming pool.
Not all the people in his band live like kings. Still every Chief of an Indian Band in Canada makes more than our Prime Minister. Harper brought in the “Accountability Act” so that these Chiefs would have to tell their band members and the rest of us where the money was being spent. It is the taxpayers’ money and we have the right to know where all this money is going. One of Trudeau’s first acts as Prime Minister was to throw out the “Accountability Act”. If you were paying attention at all and did your research you would understand this tragedy, the real issues and what needs to be done to address them.
Some statistics:
• According to the RCMP: Out of 6,420 missing persons in Canada 1,455 are women, of those only 164 are aboriginal.
• 88% of murders of aboriginal women have been solved by police
• 89% of murders of non-aboriginal women have been solved by police
• Between 1980 and 2012 there were 20,313 murders in Canada.
• 6,551 of those victims were women and only 1,017 of those were aboriginal women.
Here’s where it gets even more interesting:
• Almost 30% of the 1,017 aboriginal women were murdered by their husbands.
• 23% were murdered by another family member.
• 30% were murdered by an acquaintance.
• So, only about 8% of aboriginal women were murdered by strangers.
More statistics:
• 44% of the family members and acquaintances who kill aboriginal women were drunk.
• 74% of the murderers of aboriginal women are unemployed.
AND NOW THE MOST SHOCKING:
• 71% of the murderers of aboriginal women already had a criminal record.
• 53% had been convicted before of a violent crime;
• 62% had a history of violence with the specific murder victim herself.
To be clear, there are some Chiefs and aboriginal communities in this country that are doing well, for various reasons, but much of it has to do with their leadership.
Chief Clarence Louie of the Osoyoos Indian Band is an excellent example of quality leadership, but no one (especially the media & government) ever talk about him and his people.
Here are the REAL issues:
1. Welfare. The billions of tax payer dollars that go to support aboriginal people, not only in living expenses but free education, free medical, no taxation, etc. has crippled them (as it has crippled many non-aboriginal Canadians for generations).
I would venture to say many of them have not worked a day in their lives.
2. Corrupt leadership who have no idea how to lead, manage, inspire or teach their people .... who take for themselves and their families and friends and are not accountable to anyone (as evidenced most strongly by Chief Theresa Spence in Attawapiskat.) and blame, blame, blame the Canadian Government.
3. Alcohol and drug abuse, gang violence .... all contributing factors in the crime rate on reserves, lack of parenting, family violence and poverty.
4. A two-tiered justice system that gives aboriginal offenders lighter sentences, or no sentences at all, allowing them back into their communities to continue to abuse the same aboriginal women again and again .... often resulting in death (as evidenced by the 83% who were murdered by their husbands, a family member or an acquaintance). If you want a National Inquiry .... it should be on this issue.
When you say “It is inconceivable that we, as a country, allowed this situation to continue” .... and “We urgently need to acknowledge the systemic aspect of this crisis instead of ignoring or dismissing it. “ What are our intended solutions?”
A National Inquiry is not going to fix these problems!
Giving the aboriginals more of hard-earned Canadian taxpayer dollars is NOT going to fix this problem! WHAT ARE YOUR REAL SOLUTIONS TO THE REAL ISSUES?
Let’s get this straight.
This land does not belong to them and they never were a ‘Nation’.
These people’s ancestors did not just appear in North America, magically out of thin air one day 40 or 50,000 years ago. They came in waves across the land/ice bridge from Asia. What’s more, these waves, in many cases, were not related groups of people. They came from various places around North Eastern Asia and were from different genetic strains. In other words, the “natives of North America” are not a homogenous group of people and more importantly...they are immigrants too. Like millions of immigrants today.
The idea that the “natives” were peaceful caretakers of the land or benevolent tenants couldn’t be further from the truth. The various tribes right across Canada warred on each other constantly. They were violent. Want proof? Ask the Hurons ... oh, that’s right you can’t. The Iroquois’ wiped them out.
How about slavery that was rife among all the first nation tribes until the Europeans came and freed the slaves and put an end to this “valued cultural tradition”. Is slavery peaceful and humane?
The idea that we “stole” this land from them is also ridiculous. A more technologically advanced and numerous culture invaded and conquered.
This is exactly what has been happening since the dawn of humanity all around the globe. To say we “stole” their lands is just plain wrong. That is akin to saying the Saxons should return England to the Angles. Or maybe we should launch a campaign to have the Roman descendants give Italy back to the Etruscans. It is a nonsensical notion driven by the politically correct bleeding hearts, some intellectually deficient politicians and pressure on the Government from lobbying groups. Also, by the Indian people. It will continue to cost this country needless and wasted trillions until we get some backbone and turn off the taps.
Are these people in trouble? Yes
Do they need help? Yes.
Are they responsible enough to look after themselves and efficiently spend the billions that tax payers give them? CERTAINLY NOT!
The only way to fix this situation is to bring them into society as equals. Getting jobs and paying taxes like the rest of us because in reality, they are no more special than any of the other numerous cultures that now call Canada home. “

United Nations Now Finalizing Theft of Aboriginal Lands in Canada - UNDRIP

Oxford Dictionary Definition of Indigenization:

Noun - the action or process of bringing something under the control, dominance, or influence of the people native to an area.

The goal of Indigenization, which started by stripping Indians of their identity (Tribal People or Indians) is to isolate and separate Indians from the rest of society instead of ensuring equality in a larger society. Whether colonialism or indigenization, both seek to separate Indians from mainstream society, to cause race wars and civil unrest and both are communist concepts used to disenfranchise those who feel victimized by history, while pretending to be giving them restitution. It is actually the ’trick language’ of socialist/communist to keep Indians focused on the past and as perpetual victims.

For decades, house fires on First Nations have caused deaths and injuries at a much higher rate than off-reserve. Experts say that’s due to of a range of factors, from insufficient housing and overcrowding to improper education and funding for fire prevention and suppression services. By keeping Indians segregated from non-Indian society and their advances, they suffer needless deprivations of essentials taken for granted off reserve.

The federal government claims the main reason is that there are no ‘willing partners’ to implement proper fire codes! (archived here). That is amazing, since the government can find endless numbers of UN corporate ‘partners’ to steal the whole country and make millions miserable!

Did you know that Bill C-15 (43-2) - United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples Act (UNDRIP) (archived here) – was passed in the Senate’s third reading on June 16, 2021 without any amendment and received Royal Assent on June 21. Note: as you learn from our CONSTITUTION-CHARTER FRAUD Series, nothing and no one has given ‘royal assent’ to any bill or law since 1931.

This, folks, is our supposedly sovereign nation adopting as law, a foreign government’s laws! The UN is a foreign corporate communist government, a criminal one at that.

It’s the worst possible thing that can happen to unceded First Nations lands and many tribes recognized this fact. Idle No More rightfully rejected the UN Trojan-horse Bill C-15 outright, asserting it is an attack on Indian sovereignty and self-determination, and the theft of lands that they claim are theirs.

The UN has inserted itself into Canadian affairs by making any issue with Aboriginal (renamed Indigenous) lands a UN issue and subject to the UN Charter. This is a foreign takeover of First Nations land. Moreover, the term ‘Indigenous’ has never been defined, or at least unambiguously defined, as we explained earlier – it’s nothing more than language trickery to keep everyone bamboozled and presuming they know what it means.

Remember, ‘all’ Canadian law is to be consistent with UNDRIP. No politician or news media want to talk about Article 46.1, which states:

UNDRIP Article 46.1
Nothing in this Declaration may be interpreted as implying for any State, people, group or person any right to engage in any activity or to perform any act contrary to the Charter of the United Nations or construed as authorizing or encouraging any action, which would dismember or impair, totally or in part, the territorial integrity or political unity of sovereign and independent States.

It is important to read at least UNDRIP Articles 5, 26, 28, 29.1, 30, 32.1, 36, 46.1. as well. Note well how the UN Charter supersedes our domestic laws.

Article 26.1

Indigenous peoples have the right to the lands, territories and resources which they have traditionally owned, occupied or otherwise used or acquired.

Maxim: Custom and agreement overrule law.

Article 26.1 does not say Indigenous peoples have rights to the lands, territories and resources, which they have ‘not’ traditionally owned, occupied or otherwise used or acquired, and not without an agreement signed by you.

The UNDRIP recognises free, prior and informed consent (FPIC) as a specific right that affects Aboriginal (aka indigenous) peoples. It allows the indigenous (but not just Indians under the Indian Act or Aboriginals under the Constitution Act, 1982) to give or withhold consent to a project that may affect them or their territories. Once they have given their consent, they can withdraw it at any stage. In addition, the FPIC is supposed to enable the indigenous to negotiate the conditions under which the project will be designed, implemented, monitored and evaluated.

Right out of the gate, however, we see how the UN and the Canadian government simply ignore (archived here) their own ‘laws’. In 2016, the Trudeau government committed to “fully adopting this and working to implement it within the laws of Canada, which is our charter.” Former Minister of Justice Jody Wilson-Raybould however, described the adoption of UNDRIP as “unworkable” and “a political distraction”.

Sure enough, in late 2016, Prime Minister Justin Trudeau said, in regards to his approval of the Kinder Morgan Trans Mountain pipeline, that indigenous opponents “don’t have a veto,” directly contradicting previous promises that under his government ‘no would mean no’ for indigenous peoples when it came to resource extraction and energy infrastructure projects.

Likewise ignored was the key UNIDRIP provision the Trudeau government agreed to: obtaining “free, prior and informed consent” from indigenous peoples prior to development.

Moral of the story: whether Indian or undefined indigenous, the corporation masquerading as our government will betray you in a New York minute, just as municipalities have betrayed their constituents in an even shorter minute.

Now, doesn’t all this betrayal remind you just a little of how the UN Migration Pact (Treaty) was sold as ‘not binding’, and then suddenly, with several million 3^rd world Muslim migrants beating down our door, it was made binding on Canada within 3 days by Lloyd Axworthy? See our TREASON Series for details.

The Justice Centre for Constitutional Freedoms (JCCF) submitted a report written by Director of the Board, law professor Bruce Pardy, to the House of Commons Standing Committee on Indigenous and Northern Affairs entitled Bill C-15: Useless, dangerous, and divisive (archived here). The report highlights the following issues:

1. Aboriginal law applies different rules to different people based on race, lineage, and culture. That is an issue that Bill C-15 makes worse.
2. The existing “duty to consult” is paternalistic, incomprehensible, and unpredictable. Bill C-15 threatens to make this situation worse. Bill C-15 and UNDRIP represent an existential threat to Canada’s resource industry.
3. Indigenous persons are not permitted to own Aboriginal property. Neither Bill C-15 nor UNDRIP will change that.
4. Bill C-15 will not reduce Indigenous dependency on the federal government.
5. UNDRIP prescribes vast and broad collective land rights for Aboriginal people but no property rights for anyone else. Bill C-15 threatens to divide rather than reconcile.
6. Bill C-15 effectively grants UNDRIP quasi-constitutional status. It will become a standard to which the laws of Canada are to conform.
7. The intended consequences of Bill 41 in British Columbia foretell what Bill C-15 might mean for Canadians across the country.

Simply put, the UN takes over governance of the Canadian landmass without firing a shot.

UNDRIP: The words sound nice, and they sound right. But like everything else coming from our world government there is a nefarious and underlying motive to this. It is to steal our entire landmass.

UNDRIP, as with EVERY UN deal, is a Trojan-horse. It works to foster in Canadian Indians, the belief that all past can be undone, and they will get ALL LANDS they believe was theirs centuries ago, back, even though they had actually only used or occupied about 10-13% of the entire landmass.

The claim that UNDRIP will protect Indian tribes around the world is a fraud. Nothing can be further from the true UN plan, which is to give the UN Charter 100% control over all decisions made about the land, finally ending all property ownership in accordance with Agenda 2030. They have already stolen all non-Indian lands occupied by ‘old-stock’ Canadians through one legislative trick after another, as we’ve shown in our newsletters.

One of the main offences of UNDRIP is that it requires Indians to give up their status as Indians under the Indian Act, to become undefined ‘indigenous’ persons. Remember from our NAME THEFT Series and the CRIMINAL LANGUAGE Series, that ‘persons’ in corporate law, means a legal entity and not a man or woman.

Under the Indian Act, Indians had some protection from government overreach, but once they give up that designation to become ‘indigenous’, they are no longer protected under the Indian Act whatsoever and can have their lands taken for ‘environmental’ and ‘climate change’ reasons as required by the UN.

No wonder many tribal members do not want to be called ‘indigenous’ instead of the correct term, Indian.

(source, Indian Act, 1985)
[note: 1985 is the same year the United Nations took over governance from the Canada Act through the passing of the United Nations Act, 1985]

Definition: Indian means a person who pursuant to this Act is registered as an Indian or is entitled to be registered as an Indian.
Try to remember that in law, ‘person’ means ‘corporation, legal entity, association, but not human being.

The globalists couldn’t steal the land any other way, despite having replaced Hereditary Chiefs with government-controlled ‘Elected’ Chiefs through the fraudulent and treacherous Indian Act, so they used an Indian lawyer, Perry Bellegarde, National Chief of the Assembly of First Nations, to sucker all tribes into agreeing to this treaty.

As with most aspects of life for First Nation People in Canada, the introduction of the Indian Act in 1876 (archived here) injected a seismic shift in traditional practices, particularly by installing ‘elected’ Chiefs to bring governance under corporate government control. Prior to the Indian Act, nations had their own traditional governing structures and protocols (archived here); the mantle and power of Chiefs was frequently passed from one generation to another through cultural laws.

With the introduction of the Indian Act, which mandated (archived here) that elections must be held every two years, traditional governing structures - the very backbone of each nation - became obsolete, or at least that was the intention of the government of the day. The enforced European election process injected confusion and undermined and destroyed traditions that were as old as time itself. Some nations, however, have maintained their hereditary chief (archived here) tradition so have both hereditary and elected chiefs (archived here).

Russ Diabo, a former advisor to two national chiefs at the Assembly of First Nations, described the bill as, “the Prime Minister [...] attempting his own version of the White Paper”.

The White Paper was Pierre Trudeau and Jean Chretien’s effort to resolve the ‘Indian’ problem; Justin Trudeau’s Bill C-15 makes the enslavement, this time to the foreign criminal UN, irreversible.

Diabo criticized the Bill’s lack of Indigenous consultation, claiming it uses language designed to mislead Indigenous people, and that (the):

“UN declaration will be interpreted and implemented through the colonial Canadian constitutional framework, instead of respecting international law regarding the rights of Indigenous Peoples”

In other words, Bellegarde and other lawyers made sure the Bill was written in legalese and with terms that allow the UN to weaponize it against the First Nations tribes that do not comply with its Agenda 21 and 2030 … depopulation and end to private property ownership.

The same playbook was used in every country the British colonized – destroy the traditions of the existing society and inhabitants and insert ‘elections’ that could be rigged and the ‘winner’ controlled, taking an entire society into chaos and loss of culture. Once Canadian Indians were set up for the plucking, in walked the United Nations and UNDRIP to finish them off.

Read about the biggest issues with UNDRIP, here, by Ron Vaillant.

Also, please let us know if any of our hyperlinks have stopped working so that we can fix them. Thank you.

People-United
people-united.ca

Subscribe now

Tip via Kofi/Stripe

E-transfer tips within Canada:
ADMIN-PU@proton.me

Series #2 PROPERTY THEFT Part 17 - Tenants & Arsonists Weaponized Against Private Owners

People-United Uncensored — Thu, 09 Jul 2026 12:02:16 GMT

Small Landlords Are Now Guinea Pigs Being Set Up For Dispossession

Moving across Ontario is a licencing scheme that requires small landlords to obtain a licence to rent a unit on their private property. While they claim it is only a ‘pilot project’ in a couple of cities, we know from experience that it will be imposed across Ontario…so pay attention to what is happening and be ready with neighbours to close it down.

As of May 31, 2023, all small landlords with UP TO four units in Windsor’s Ward 1 & 2? (Downtown/West End where much of the city’s student rentals are located) were required to apply for and obtain a Windsor rental licence under the RRL By-law (Residential Rental Licensing By-law). This slow boil of the proverbial frog will soon rage across Windsor.

Cost of the licence started at $463 PER UNIT.

The City of Windsor launched this new Windsor Rental License Pilot Study in 2023 in just two wards (this is how a frog is boiled – slowly) aimed at improving safety in existing rental housing stock and enhancing proactive property standards enforcement efforts. With the ‘safety’ term in there, they can unleash ‘officials’ incentivized with big salaries to ‘enhance’ their enforcement actions on private property.

Of course, there is no indication that there was ever a ‘safety’ problem in the past, and of course, this is intended to give property standards officers more control over private property, despite the prohibitions on such ‘enforcement’ upheld by superior court and appeal court decisions.

Proactive means that any excuse for trespassing on a small landlord’s property and use of ‘opinions’ to force the landlord to undertake expensive and unnecessary renovations and upgrades to satisfy a tenant will do.

Proactive means that even if there is no tenant complaint, they can search for, and find, some ‘violation’ to harass a target property.

The two-year pilot study followed the regulatory framework approved by City Council back in April 2023 and began with the proclamation of By-law #14-2023 on February 13, 2023. It is now in place as policy and by-law.

Windsor councillors claimed that in ‘many, many’ neighbourhoods, complaints are not coming in when it comes to units that are not up to building and fire codes.

In other words, there are no complaints, so even though there is no problem, they will impose inspections and all manner of upgrades anyway, the cost of which will have to be passed on to the tenants.

On February 4, 2025, the Ontario Court of Appeal dismissed a court challenge by Windsor Housing Providers Inc. (WHP) that represents hundreds of area landlords, against the City of Windsor’s residential rental licensing pilot project. Landlords and Windsor property owners already struggle under 20 property standards by-laws.

The appeal had been launched after the Ontario Superior Court of Justice ruled in March 2024 that the city’s residential rental licensing bylaw was valid and refused the requested order for a halt to the implementation of the measure. WHP had argued the bylaw was passed in bad faith.

Ontario Superior Court Justice Kelly Gorman had sided with the City and now “another level of bureaucracy” and expense at a time of higher interest rates and property taxes can be enforced. Never mind that she imposed on private property matters, and left institutional rental companies free to continue as slum landlords.

“In a statement issued immediately after the decision, the group called the RRL one of the most expensive programs of its kind in Ontario and said it will result in skyrocketing rents, a loss of housing stock and withdrawal of investment from the city of Windsor.”
~ CBC report March 27, 2024

And just as all these intrusions are made permanent, Windsor council moved 2 months after the landlords’ court challenge to make the by-law city-wide.

Clearly, none of this is about ‘safety’ otherwise they would apply to institutional property investment companies (many are slum landlords). It’s about massive revenue generation and total control of private property.

Under the new by-law, owners of rental property are now required to secure a residential rental licence for each rented unit, pay for inspections such as electrical inspections and fork out endless monies for bureaucratic red tape. Note, this additional expense and forced participation is not forced on institutional housing companies.

To secure a licence, property owners must take the following steps:

Complete a licence application form
Confirm ownership and show proper insurance
Provide a local contact for the unit
Show that the unit meets legislated requirements, including Building Code, Fire Code, and Electrical Safety Standards

If a small landlord is smart, they will stop renting, period. If the people of Windsor are smart, they will march into City Hall and escort the mayor, the councillors and the planners out of the building and replace them with a provisional council, after which they can conduct a new election.

The by-law ensures that tenants become a small landlord’s worst nightmare, weaponized by official tyrants at City Hall. Of course, tenants complaints will be confidential, so the likelihood of manufactured complaints is high.

This by-law will ensure that small landlords will have to sell their properties or just withdraw the rental unit from the market -- eventually those tenants will have no place to live or will have to rent from institutional investors at extremely high rental rates.

But the main reason for the ‘study’ had been to see what bugs need to be ironed out before they impose this licensing on all small landlords. It is a test run – even the court decisions were part of the theatre.

In the meantime, many students will be sleeping on the street, and if they find someone to give them a roof over their head, the municipality will attack the property owner.

The following is only one of hundreds of examples of the extreme cruelty exercised against any Ontarian who provides shelter to those made homeless not because of lifestyle, but because of targeted harm against Canadians, as the grip on private property is now in its final stage of complete extinguishment of private property ownership.

It’s not about safety or protection: it’s about cruelty, communism and theft

In Napanee, Ontario, the homelessness is also epidemic due to the deliberate policies pushed by the United Nations to engineer society, which includes ending private property ownership.

In this recent story, the property owner is pushing back against the Napanee municipality’s encampment shutdown order – simply for providing some homeless with a decent place to live on his large property. He is not IN ANY WAY HARMING OTHERS OR CAUSING A PUBLIC HEALTH OR SAFETY ISSUE.

And the property owner says he has no intention of forcing residents out unless they have somewhere else to go, order or no order.

In an interview with Emergency Response Watch (ERW), Jack Belanger, 74, defended his use of the rural property at 1388 Bridge Street West, Napanee, describing it as an effort to help individuals experiencing homelessness rather than operating an illegal trailer park, which is the municipal corporation’s manufactured ‘excuse’ for intruding on his use of his property.

“I’m not going to kick the people out of here unless they have a feasible place to go. They’re happy here. They have a little something to themselves.”

~ Jack Belanger, Napanee Property Owner

The property is currently subject to an Ontario Superior Court injunction requiring all occupants to vacate the property and all structures to be removed by June 1, 2026, after the Town determined the site violated zoning and safety by-laws.

The Town of Greater Napanee is preparing to bring Belanger’s property into compliance after the Judge ruled his use of trailers and cinderblock structures to house people violated its Zoning By-law. Now, unsheltered people must sleep on the street to be ‘legal’, since it is illegal to sleep in good clean house trailers or cinderblock structures (which were all the rage in the 1960s and 70s across Canada).

Yet, as you learned from our post on the illegality of municipal corporations enforcing by-laws on private property in the absence of public safety or health risks, this municipal gang is earning their incentivizing paycheques by targeting those who actually do good in society.

Belanger said the situation began after he acquired several trailers from a closed trailer park in Yarker, Ontario, initially intending to repurpose them.

His plans changed when individuals without housing asked to stay on the property.

“At first I was hesitant, it wasn’t my plan.”

As winter approached, Belanger said he installed woodstoves in the trailers and allowed people to remain on the property.

“It was just to help the people.”

Everything is neat and clean; it is clear Belanger is a responsible property owner and a stellar human being:

The property was never intended to operate as a commercial trailer park.

“If I was (running a trailer park), I’d apply for a permit and a license.”

Town officials and fire services have previously described the property as unsafe, citing fire risks, sanitation concerns, and a lack of proper infrastructure. But they are not PUBLIC SAFETY ISSUES; they are on private property!

Moreover, these town official claims are exaggerations and manufactured excuses to control the use of his property:

“I don’t have any fire hazards on the property. The woodstoves were WETT-certified and double walled.”

Belanger also stated that smoke alarms were installed in all trailers, water is brought in from the local water station in Napanee, and the property includes outhouse facilities with a holding tank and a septic bed is being built.

Belanger claims fire officials previously inspected the site and requested improvements, which he says were completed quickly.

Belanger said that 8 individuals are currently living on the property, including himself. He confirmed residents are paying rent, and that some receive government housing supports using the property address. He believes removing them will lead to further strain on the community, “if they leave here, they’ll end up downtown, in parks and in tents.”

The Town of Greater Napanee has described the situation as a multi-year enforcement issue, ultimately requiring court action to address zoning violations and safety risks. And of course, the courts being shills of the UN, go right along with the violation of private property rights that high-courts have repeatedly sanctioned.

Belanger says he has cooperated with officials. We believe this, because these tyrants only go after law-abiding citizens (especially seniors) while criminals walk free, getting every imaginable protection the ‘officials’ can provide.

“I’ve never stopped anyone from coming in and looking around.” I just wish they would try and work with me. It’s disheartening.”

Frustrated with how the situation has been handled by ‘officials’, Belanger is now seeking legal representation and indicated future access (to taxpayer-funded tyrants) to the property may have to change.

Belanger says he intends to continue cleaning and organizing the property, including relocating unused trailers and materials. However, he strongly opposes the possibility of municipal enforcement action.

Belanger also expressed concern about how enforcement could unfold if the Township enters the property.

“They aren’t going to come on the property, somebody might get hurt … Just rezone my property so that I can help these people … I’m willing to work with them if they’re willing to work with me.”

The Town has stated it will proceed with enforcement if the property is not brought into ‘compliance’ by June 1, including hiring contractors to clear the site at a cost expected to exceed $50,000. Meanwhile, Belanger maintains he will not remove residents without viable alternatives.

“I just want them to leave me and these people alone.”

The situation now represents a growing standoff between municipal enforcement and a property owner who says he is providing shelter for people with nowhere else to go. His is not creating a PUBLIC HEALTH, SAFETY OR NUISANCE ISSUE.

Then a third party enters the scene as hundreds of thousands of taxpayer dollars go into fighting about what ‘officials’ can do on private property to good, decent private property owners.

According to a news report of September 18, 2025, all sides have backed down after the town of Greater Napanee was warned about potential legal action last month by Lennox and Addington county. The town’s encampment protocol map was in question.

The county’s letter stated that Lennox and Addington “does not intend to pursue any further legal remedy to the disputes that existed.” The letter also noted the county would pass its own bylaw regarding the matter at hand (Belanger’s use of his property to help 7 homeless people).

The town had originally held a special meeting on August 27, 2025 to review the legal action threatened. The county’s request (directive) was that the town cease distributing its encampment protocol map that identified public property, including county lands.

The issue at hand between the county and the town is a map being distributed to the public, both housed and unhoused, outlining areas within Greater Napanee wherein it is illegal to seek shelter.

The map, distributed by bylaw officials, is intended to outline where they are restricted from sheltering as per the Parks Bylaw and Encampment Protocol. As you read about this ‘map’ controversy, people are still seeking ‘shelter’ by the thousands, but that is definitely not as important as making the seeking of shelter in prohibited areas illegal!

One of the points that should jump out at you from the article is the reference to the authority to map out ‘sheltering’ areas on PUBLIC PROPERTY. There is no mention, nor should there be, of mapping areas on PRIVATE PROPERTY, such as Belanger’s.

According to this news report:

“In response to the county’s latest letter, town council authorized staff to offer a fee waiver on town facilities so the county can conduct public consultation with Napanee residents for their own encampment legislation at no cost.”

What is very clear in this, is that these officials and their corporate masters ARE NOT IN THE BUSINESS of making improvements in the lives of the homeless, nor in the lives of those decent enough to help in the abatement of suffering of the homeless.

IT IS CLEAR THEY ARE PAID TO cause as much hardship to all concerned, while building massive bureaucracies of Nazi-like Brown Shirts. How much has all this municipal effort to terrorize and abuse the public spent so far that could have been spent on lowering taxes and providing other assistance?

Municipality Spends almost $1 million to Deprive a Senior of Her Property and 4 Families of a Decent Home During a Housing Crisis

Another extremely disgusting abuse of a senior private property owner is captured in a series of Substack articles, complete with hard evidence of absolute municipal corruption, by the owner, starting here. From her 15 posts, you learn that the City of Belleville, Ontario -- also using endless manufactured excuses -- have spent almost a million dollars by 2024 to deprive her of her property.

They not only deprive her of all use, including of being able to sell it, but deprive 4 families of nice, modern apartments for 15 years and counting. Think about that – at least 4 people sleeping on the street instead of in a warm apartment, all because we have let municipal officials take over our lives and humanity.

Tenants Weaponized Against Small Landlords

Using the Residential Tenancy Act, the provincial government has made extortion legal for tenants, fully depriving thousands of small landlords of any control on how their property will be used, and if the rent agreed to will ever be paid. The legislation over-rides valid written contracts between landlords and tenants, and causing many landlords to go bankrupt.

How this is ‘helping’ the housing crisis created by the government is a mystery, because as more small landlords exit the rental market, the shortage of rentals is made worse and many of those bankrupted landlords end up on the street as well.

Many small landlords have come to realize the massive injustices foisted deliberately on private property owners under the pretext of residential tenancy law.

The police claim they can’t do anything about landlord-tenant issues, even when the tenant is recorded threatening violence and death and when they attack the landlord and do property damage.

Tenants, it appears, have been elevated above the law. But why?

Even a cursory review of everything associated with the small landlord/tenant issues in Ontario indicates that the government (UN) has, by design, weaponized tenants against property owners who happen to rent out some part of their property.

And yes, there are some terrible landlords, but according to the statistics, the numbers are miniscule compared to the epidemic of bad tenants created by the Residential Tenancy Act of Ontario. The goal is very obviously to equip tenants with the means to bankrupt small landlords and drive them off their properties.

IF the concern was really about protecting tenants, then all laws would apply equally to property rentals. Yet they don’t apply to commercial rental properties – highrises and other commercial rental situations where slum landlords are usually found.

The injustices against small landlords at the hands of the Landlord Tenant Boards (LTB) amount to the transfer of control of private property to bureaucrats appointed by the government (UN government), the loss of investment and the facilitation of theft of private property by tenants-turned-squatters.

In fact, it all amounts to an extinguishment of property rights altogether for the property owner who rents out even so much as a room in their private home. If the tenant has taken over the unit and is living free off the landlord, this is theft by illegal occupation, but you need, and rarely get, an LTB order for eviction.

Corrupt and ethically-bankrupt Landlord Tenant Tribunals in Ontario have taken constructive possession of rental units in private premises and control everything associated with the tenant, entirely disempowering the rightful property owner/landlord. Eviction is not possible without their blessing!

Tenants who do not meet the condition of the occupancy--such as paying the rent on time--are now permitted to squat for months, and often years, without paying a cent of rent. In one recent case reported on mainstream news, the landlord who could not get an LTB hearing for 2 years already, was owed over $100,000 -- meaning that the tenant stole $100,000 from the landlord with the assistance of the LTB.

Is there any difference between a tenant who has not paid rent for years, amounting to over $5,000, such as has been reported recently across Ontario, and a squatter who is trespassing and using the property for free?

It is common sense that once they do not pay their rent, and in many cases rent and utility bills, which are the conditions for occupying the property, they become a trespasser.

Why are landlords unable to have police charge these tenants-turned-squatters with grand larceny when they don’t pay their rent for months on end, since failing to satisfy their end of the tenancy contract renders them nothing more than squatters stealing material benefits from the property owner?

You don’t get to rent a hotel room, run up a tab, refuse to pay and/or leave, without police involvement. So why are small landlords treated differently?

‘Squatter’s rights’ is the common phrase; ‘adverse possession’ is the legal term. This refers to a situation where others who continuously use a portion of your private property for at least 10 years — in the absence of your objection to that use — can potentially claim legal use to that portion of your property.

But now in Ontario, even when you object and try to have unauthorized ‘tenants’ removed, the government’s UN landlord-tenant tribunals deprive the rightful owner from recovering their property. It is even worse if squatters/trespassers are found camping out on your rural land.

The landlord can object all they like, but it falls on deaf ears and amounts to having made no objection until finally the LTB provides a hearing and the eviction order, if ever it does. If you cannot get a hearing to argue for an order evicting the tenant for 2 years or more, you can’t prove that you objected to the tenant’s possession.

What would keep such a corrupt government from lowering the length of time of adverse possession from 10 years to 5, even 3 years, allow tenants to file for possession of legal title thereafter?

Think this can’t happen? There are over 54,000 outstanding applications before the LTB in Ontario that have gone without any action whatsoever by the board.

In Ontario, the law sets out a series of conditions for a claim of title to the property by means of ‘adverse possession’. This generally requires the squatter/trespasser to be in “open, notorious and continuous” possession of a section of the true owner’s property for at least 10 uninterrupted years. Furthermore, they must have an intention of excluding the owner from using their land and be able to verify that they had, in fact, accomplished that.

If a tenant changes the locks and refuses entry to the landlord, as often happens, hasn’t he intentionally ‘excluded’ the landlord from his property?

For the “squatter” to legally prevent the registered owner’s right to occupy and use the property, they must prove their case in court, or so the rules state. But when the court is the Landlord Tenant Board and hearing dates are not set down for years, and those hearing dates are many months down the road, the ‘act of preventing’ has been established by default.

You can’t get into the regular court until you’ve navigated the ‘legislated’ tribunal’s deliberate setup to impede your access to justice. (That’s the case with EVERY tribunal.)

Landlords cannot do anything to regain possession without LTB approval, which is almost impossible to get, since (a) hearings can take 2-3 years to be set down, and (b) hearings can be adjourned endlessly, and (c) LTB orders can allow tenants grace periods of months before a Sheriff can evict them and even then, the period during which they can leave their possessions in the apartment or house can be extensive.

As you see, the savvy tenant-turned-squatter can go a very long time squatting at a landlord’s expense.

According to Canada’s Criminal Code Section 322(1)

Every one commits theft who fraudulently and without colour of right takes, or fraudulently and without colour of right converts to his use or to the use of another person, anything, whether animate or inanimate, with intent
(a) to deprive, temporarily or absolutely, the owner of it, or a person who has a special property or interest in it, of the thing or of his property or interest in it;
(b) to pledge it or deposit it as security;
(c) to part with it under a condition with respect to its return that the person who parts with it may be unable to perform; or
(d) to deal with it in such a manner that it cannot be restored in the condition in which it was at the time it was taken or converted.

Can you agree that tenants who do not pay their rent for extended periods are not only in violation of their tenancy contracts with the landlord, but are occupying a property under false pretense of being a tenant, who is defined as someone who pays consideration to occupy the residential space?

These squatters are depriving the landlord of his property, and refusing to give it back. They are stealing the property and if forcing the landlord to pay the utilities used, stealing utilities.

Why is this not treated as the crime of theft if under $5,000, or grand larceny when the rental arrears are over $5,000, as well as trespass? It can ONLY be because the government (UN) wants small property owners harmed, bankrupted, and distressed while unable to fight back in a proper court, even if they could find a fair judge and afford the legal fees.

As time passes, and we know how quickly that happens, they meet the ‘test’ for adverse possession, especially if the period of adverse possession is reduced. The criteria are:

they had actual possession of the property in issue;
they intended to exclude the true owner from possession of his property; and
they effectively excluded the true owner from possession of his property.

It’s easy to see that the tenant had possession of the property since the landlord can’t remove them, and that the tenant intended and did exclude the true owner from his property. If the Residential Tenancy Act and the ethically-bankrupt LTB continue to act against landlords as they do, it won’t be long that tenants will have met the ‘test’ for adverse possession for 10 years. A savvy tenant could then potentially file for possessory title by way of adverse possession.

Why is there an exemption for tenants who ‘steal’ thousands from victimized landlords by becoming squatters/trespassers protected by the landlord-tenant tribunals? ‘Cause it was all set up this way by the UN and is rolling out as designed in their kangaroo courts.’

Here is a November 2023, CBC report, illustrating how tenants are extorting landlords, and living for free in the process …you will not believe the criminality, such as a tenant refusing to pay rent for a year, but while pocketing the rent he would normally pay, rents the place out to other occupants, using the landlord’s asset to make money in the hundreds of thousands of dollars annually! Stealing another’s asset to generate income for yourself, while living for free, can only happen in communist Canada where the government has created poverty by design.

Ontario’s small landlords have effectively lost control over their own properties. Agreements regarding occupancy limits, pets, smoking, or other conditions are increasingly treated as meaningless, as the Landlord and Tenant Board is empowered to override valid contracts with little consequence.

A tenant can rent an apartment as a single occupant and, the next day, move numerous additional people into the unit, charge them rent, and dramatically alter the nature of the occupancy — while the property owner is left with no immediate recourse. What would ordinarily be considered fraud, trespass, or misuse of property in any other context has become normalized under a system that leaves small landlords powerless to protect their homes and investments.

One Ottawa case illustrates how extreme the situation has become.

A senior, who shall remain anonymous for her own safety, rented out her fully furnished basement apartment as short-term accommodation for students and visitors. A couple applied to stay for approximately one month at $40 per day, while waiting for possession of a newly purchased home. They claimed to be employed, non-smokers, and without pets.

The moment they moved in, the situation changed completely. Without any prior discussion or permission, they brought four pit bull-cross dogs into the small furnished apartment, apparently for breeding purposes. The apartment was quickly damaged as they began setting up a kennel operation inside the unit. They installed surveillance cameras in the landlord’s private areas outside the apartment, smoked inside the building despite agreeing not to, never went to work, and never paid any rent.

When the senior demanded the dogs be removed, the couple claimed they would leave by the middle of the month and surrender the dogs to the SPCA. It soon became clear they intended to do neither. Instead, they began presenting themselves as permanent tenants with unrestricted “rights” to occupy and control the property.

The situation escalated further when the couple pre-emptively contacted police, falsely accusing the senior landlord of breaking into the apartment, stealing a dog, and taking their car keys. They tampered with the building’s entry system and alleged she was unlawfully denying them access. They also filed complaints with Ottawa By-law, alleging there was no heat, water, or electricity in the apartment.

Authorities responded immediately to the tenants’ complaints. Police, by-law officers, and fire officials attended the senior’s home and demanded inspections, despite the lack of evidence supporting the allegations. The landlord was interrogated about the layout of her own home, while officials informed her that the tenants had the right to install surveillance cameras and possess as many animals as they wished. When she raised the issue of unpaid rent, she was told it was a matter for the Landlord and Tenant Board.

The couple also contacted Ontario’s Ministry of Municipal Affairs and Housing, falsely claiming they had paid rent and were being unlawfully locked out. After speaking with the senior and reviewing the circumstances, a ministry official advised her to replace the battery in the keypad lock, document that it was functioning properly, and immediately retain a paralegal — an additional expense imposed on the victim of the situation.

Meanwhile, evidence increasingly showed the complaints were fabricated. Police observed signs that the keypad lock had been tampered with and saw the unauthorized surveillance camera installation. The woman who claimed her car keys had been stolen later drove away in her vehicle. By-law officers initially found electricity disconnected in the apartment, but the landlord pointed out that the breaker panel was located inside the unit and accessible only to the occupants. When officers unexpectedly returned later, they discovered all the power functioning normally, strongly suggesting the tenants themselves had shut off the breakers in order to manufacture evidence against the landlord.

By that stage, the senior had effectively lost the use of significant portions of her own property. The dogs were being allowed to roam the backyard freely, preventing her from safely accessing her yard or garage.

The broader issue is not simply one abusive tenancy. It is the systemic imbalance that leaves small property owners vulnerable while rewarding deception and manipulation. Police, by-law officers, ministry staff, and other public resources were consumed responding to false and malicious complaints, costing taxpayers thousands of dollars. Yet despite the apparent fabrication of allegations and misuse of public resources, no charges were laid against the couple.

Why is this important? Because now Property Standards Officers have been given unlimited authority to enter all private property and to issue orders for expensive work on the complaint of a tenant.

The message being sent is clear: small landlords are expected to absorb the financial loss, emotional distress, property damage, and legal expense, while those exploiting the system face little or no accountability.

Arsonists Paid to Burn Down Private Property – RCMP Assist

Across British Columbia, Maui, California and other locations, communist governments are pushing the climate change fraud for profit and to enable the theft of private lands.

These communist arsonists have been deliberately setting fires and ordering firefighters and police to do nothing and/or prevent residents from trying to save their homes, belongings and in Maui, to escape the fire.

In this video (archived here), Dan Dicks of Press For Truth covers the Shuswap fires, exposing the Director of Wildfire Operations in BC, Cliff Chapman, admitting that they started the fires with a planned ignition and that they did this even though they knew strong winds were approaching.

Witnesses say the RCMP ordered local police to stop anyone from entering the area under the pretext of “preventing looting”. This is actually a well-worn excuse, used, as one example, in Calgary, Alberta, to drive people from their homes during a once-in-a-hundred-year flood, so that police could break into homes, confiscate legally-owned guns and other items unhindered.

In Shuswap, police set up blockades and prohibited homeowners and volunteers from accessing much needed food, water, generators and fuel in their desperate effort to fight the fires to protect their property.

Of course, behind this operation, the mainstream media painted a glowing picture of firefighters and the police acting in the best interest of homeowners but the video shows a much different situation, where firefighters were told to stand down and the police stated firmly that they “were just following orders” when denying people their right to self-preservation. The government and police interference is reminiscent of what happened two years ago in Monte Lake and Paxton Valley, BC.

The truth is that Shuswap fires were INTENTIONALLY SET by Canadian Authorities with PLANNED IGNITION and when they knew the winds would be strongest!!!

Homeowners and ranchers are equipped to put fires out at the early stages but when the government steps in as discussed in this documentary titled ‘A Valley Destroyed part 1 – The Story of Monte Lake and Paxton Valley’ (archived here) and prohibits them from doing so, the consequences are devastating. Part II of the story is here (archived here).

As you see from those videos, ranchers were being instructed not to fight the fires. However, they are more than qualified to successfully extinguish them with minimal damage to their land and property, if they act quickly. In these rural communities there were local residents armed with bulldozers and other equipment ready to bury the fuel the flames were devouring, but they were denied access.

“The fire was small and easily containable but BC Wildfire Services would not let anyone in to fight that fire and let it burn for 48 hours because of red tape and bureaucracy that is useless.”

With COVID lockdowns over, globalists are now burning down Canada to steal private property. This is an old wealth transfer tactic going back thousands of years. Once the land is bare, it is expropriated, or simply taken by the government and sold to developers or put under the control of one or more of the United Nations many NGOs and agencies.

Globalists have launched a tsunami of wildfires, all pretty much started by arsonists or arsonists with Directed Energy Weapons (DEWs), such as lasers and tasers. You can learn more about SILENT WEAPONS from our upcoming series by that name.

First, it was California that was burnt to the ground using DEWs to start one fire after another. Who got the land after the people fled the area to start over elsewhere? The corporate municipality.

Then it was Fort McMurray, Alberta where the Premier had sent all the forest firefighters and their firefighting aircraft away just before the setting of the fires to ensure the place burnt down. Who got the land – the corporate province.

Then, in May and June 2023, many wildfires were started in BC, Nova Scotia and Southern Quebec, practically simultaneously.

Mainstream media fails to tell us that a great many fires were started by climate-change arsonists, trying to bolster the failing climate-change narrative. They consistently remember, however, to suggest they are caused by the non-existent ‘climate change’.

Funny, isn’t it, how climate-change doesn’t seem to affect where the rich live?

Now, do you really believe that wildfires start suddenly in clusters like that? If you don’t you are among those who are bright enough to recognize a scorched-earth action by those who have said they would destroy the entire earth if they failed in installing their world government this time. These are the eco-fascists!

Climate Change or … Arson and Land Grabs used as a Catalyst for Canadian FEMA (archived here) is the Reese Report on the how the Canadian government used Directed Energy Weapons to start the fires and then prevented owners and residents from fighting the fires when they had just started and were controllable.

Many Canadians believe that the government’s climate change propaganda has grown into a religious cult that consists of eco-terrorists and Antifa agitators working on their behalf.

There are also evolving evidence that Directed Energy Technology (DEWS) is being used to start the fires, and when combined with 5G and geoengineering technology, is causing extreme ignitions and creating a perfect storm of fires and explosions.

The mainstream news and RCMP refuse to address these facts, reporting only that the majority of fires were indeed set by arsonists.

Regardless of the fact arsonists are starting these fires and the police and fire departments are preventing residents from putting them out, Justin Trudeau endlessly claimed these arsons are the result of climate change, knowing full well all ethical scientists have proven there is no climate change crisis.

See more in our SILENT WEAPONS Series about these DEWS and other weapons the government is using on its own people.

The Canadian government has a National Emergency Response System, which -- no surprise -- consists of ‘international globalist stakeholders’ that are now claiming that it is necessary to also develop a national disaster response agency to deal with ‘extreme weather events’. More bureaucracy to cause more distress.

In fact, these foreign criminals are developing a Canadian version of the United States’ Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA), which murdered residents in Maui in cold blood and then robbed them.

People also need to understand that FEMA is not federal. FEMA manages the aftermath of pre-planned attacks. Canada, as we noted above, wants to set up a FEMA in Canada, just by another name.

FEMA is a “lethal” agency that creates emergencies so that they can manage them and create their alleged desired “lethal” goals. Backdoor access to your wireless devices has been secretly granted to create a blacklist of individuals to target.

The World Economic Forum has been quietly granted backdoor access to billions of cellphones as part of a plot to compile “blacklists” of users who hold “politically incorrect” views and commit “wrong speak”…

Targeted Individuals, for many years, have been ‘gang stalked’ -- that is, tracked, monitored, injured, and murdered from frequencies from many devices including (but not limited to) cell phones. When electronic devices are in CLOSE proximity, they can exchange an individual’s full ID (Identity) between electronic devices.

After a period of time, FEMA can analyze the IDs stored in the electronic device and generate a Social Credit Score. After a subsequent period of time, FEMA can change the individual’s partial ID with a new one, reflecting information garnered from the cell phone as a result of the Emergency Broadcasting System.

WARNING –FEMA’s testing of ALL wireless connectivity WILL secretly allow deployment of the Social Credit Scoring System (CSQR-SM). This is 100% permanent human enslavement.

Of course, none of that can happen as they plan if we all wean off our addiction to ‘convenient’ technologies.

Learn more about how your capture is done using Frequency Warfare, here (archived here).

Also, please let us know if any of our hyperlinks have stopped working so that we can fix them. Thank you.

People-United
people-united.ca

Subscribe now

Tip via Kofi/Stripe

E-transfer tips within Canada:
ADMIN-PU@proton.me

Series #2 PROPERTY THEFT Part 16B - Other Property Stolen

People-United Uncensored — Sun, 05 Jul 2026 12:02:00 GMT

In this second part of two (the first part is here), we delve into the many other private property items that the government and their corporate buddies steal from us without our realizing it -- cars, pensions, firearms, bank accounts, 2^nd homes, cottages, our given names, livestock, pets and children, private data and your unique ID. What about our Private information?

Personal Information Banks (PIB) – stealing YOUR private information

Private data and personal information is private property. Any attempt to steal it is attempted theft. The government has secretly stolen our private property, that being our personal information and private data. There is always a pretext and that pretext is always (a) it’s convenient, (b) its about protecting the public, and (c) cutting costs.

This corporation-masquerading-as-government theft affects all pensioners, veterans, educational institutions, students, medical patients, etc.

The federal government has quietly (secretly) been installing the Personal Information Banks (PIB) to collect and store data on Canadians WITHOUT THEIR KNOWLEDGE OR CONSENT. We were not consulted nor informed about the creation or existence of these databases and our private information is being collected without our permission or knowledge and turned into lucrative commodities for those who trade in personal data (without paying us for it which makes it ‘property theft’ and privacy violation). These databases allow globalists to track and control EVERY aspect of our lives.

Categories of information collected in the imposter federal government’s PERSONAL INFORMATION BANK(PIB) include biometrics (DNA, blood type, eye/facial scan, fingerprints, etc), personal biography, medical history, legal action history, financial history, credit information, social media opinions or views of or about individuals particularly political elite, and much more. Every bit of it has been commercialized and sold to various corporations on the open market.

Here is a link (archived here) to the Canadian government website describing the PIBs. Scroll to the last section for Categories of Information.

Private medical and financial information is now being collected, stored and sold, under the pretext of providing improved healthcare and deathcare (MAiD) services. For-profit data corporations are set up under the pretext of providing better healthcare data-sharing between providers, who then expand their accesses to private medical information and with whom they share, for a fee. THERE is no protection and the Privacy Commissioner where complaints are ‘investigated’ has no teeth. An example of a data pirate is the land management corporation called TERANET. Their scheme started out as transferring electronic paper land records to electronic format – that was all there was to be.

By 2026, they own our land management system, control all property titles, sell all private property information without our consent or compensation, and have expanded their ‘data game’ into the for-profit healthcare industry. Learn about this dastardly schemer, TERANET, by checking our PROPERTY THEFT Parts 4, and 5a-e.

Hiding behind a curtain of ‘legislation’ patients are kept in the dark about what is done with their medical and financial information, while doctors are forced to share patient files (charts) with private corporations. The harvesting and selling (sharing) of private medical data is now at epidemic levels to be used for nefarious purposes by the world government, such as to know who is unvaccinated with mRNA gene-editing injections, who is a prime target for the euthanasia and organ harvesting, and who is ready for an abortion.

Private property includes medical and financial information; it should have full protection under the law. But as the federal government Minister Lametti stated in 2022, there is no such thing as private property rights in Canada. Most people thought he meant only land…but he referred to all property, including your children, which is why parents are shut out of their children’s lives by school staff.

Whistleblowers alleged that a University of Toronto data project collected 600,000 patient records without consent (archived here). That project is called UTOPIAN. Patients have been left completely in the dark, the complaint alleges, with no conversations, emails or waivers advising them that UTOPIAN is downloading their full medical chart. The name UTOPIAN for a medical data-harvesting system should alert anyone to the fact that this is all a World Economic/UN/WHO system of total control of everyone, under the pretext of building a more utopian (social/communist) mono-nation under their control.

The Universities behind this harvesting of private data for sharing with ever-expanding private corporations are the same ones who were pushing the false COVID-19 and COVID experimental vaccines, as well as lockdowns and human rights violations in Canada, from 2020 to the present – U of Toronto, McMaster and several others were all involved.

The Canada Revenue Agency (CRA) has quietly added it to their Privacy Terms so that in order to submit an application for benefits, such as the One-Time Housing Top Up they started bribing Canadians with in December 2022, you must click that you agree to terms including “...being described in Personal Information Bank (under development)” in order to submit your application. It is also a term in the Canada Pension Plan (CPP) application. It quite likely will be a term for submitting your income tax return, so read those Privacy Terms when filing your taxes this year!

The federal government is using the federal health transfers to bribe the premiers to adopt a Big Tech-style data-for-services healthcare system. In other words, you get no healthcare unless you agree to share your private life with globalist corporations. This especially means that your personal health records that used to be private and confidential between you and your doctor will now be entered into the PIBs to be shared between the federal government, their stakeholders (eg. globalists such as UN/WEF/World Bank, and whoever else they decide can have access to it (courts, lawyers, social workers, etc.) which are all international for-profit globalist corporation controlled.

They lay it all out in their Departmental Plan for Health Canada 2022/23 (archived here). There is no mention of hiring health care workers. It’s all data, digitization, AI (Artificial Intelligence), vaccines, more data, more private information, and still more data!

This is a big deal. It is 100% enslavement – the keeping of human farms.

They do not have the lawful right to steal our personal information and use our own tax dollars to bribe us into compliance. What they do have is a lot of bluffing! Always remember that silence can be and is taken as ‘implied consent’.

Check our upcoming TAXATION FRAUD page in this Series #2 to learn how the CRA has no legal or lawful authority whatever do be collecting taxes from individual men and women.

Personal Information Banks (PIB) go hand-in-hand with:

Shared Services Canada (archived here) – a private corporation dealing in Solutions-Based Informatics Professional Services Supply Arrangement—Domains of Expertise- Business Transformation – Strategic Advisory Services - Tender Notice and CanadaBuys

YOUR private property has now become the exclusive property of private corporations. A private contractor will now own the personal financial information of every Canadian tracked.

Because private information is the commodity of a private contractor, no one will be able to know what information has been used against them and if it was inserted into their history to destroy their credit rating and lives. Just another way to smother dissent.

None of these data pirates are subject to Freedom of Information requests.

The imposter Canadian government awarded a contract to Equifax, a credit-rating agency:

Some of what that contract involves (archived here) --

3. Criteria for assessment of the Statement of Capabilities (Minimum Essential Requirements)
The Office of the Superintendent of Financial Institutions Canada has a requirement for Equifax Ignite – Economic Indicators, subscription and multiple user licenses.
Any interested supplier must demonstrate by way of a statement of capabilities that it meets the following requirements:
Ability to immediately provide access to consumer credit risk reporting through an online user interface to OSFI, which covers a minimum of 5 years of information from 2023. The reporting needs to include both high-level descriptive statistics (e.g. total outstandings), as well as credit performance metrics (e.g. delinquencies).
Ability to deliver historical (up to 25 years) consumer credit risk data. OSFI will own the proprietary rights to the historical consumer credit risk data from the provider once delivered.

Remember that all these consulting and data capture companies are controlled by the same globalists and share information without boundaries.

This is all part of the rolling out of the Chinese Communist version of the Social Credit System. See here a video that shows you what is already well entrenched in Canada as you read this.

SMART City Data Trust Steal Your Life: SMART Cities Outsmarting Property Owners

Your private information and data is property, in fact, perhaps outside your land and home, body, and children, the most important property you have.

If your data and information property is under the control of legal entities such as corporations and foreign banks, you have no property. The globalist corporation ORION is leading the way in the SMART data trust theft industry in Ontario. Learn about this gang called ORION Ontario here. Notice how all their partners are globalist (World Government) operations.

You either control your property OR you are property.

Ontario Research and Innovation Optical Network (ORION) is one of the largest Research, Education and Innovation (RE&I) networks in the world. It connects all of Ontario’s universities, most colleges, several teaching hospitals, public research facilities, and a growing number of Ontario’s school boards to one another and to a global network of RE&I connections.

Note: where you see any reference to Ontario or Province of Ontario, know that these are now the names of the World Government’s regions in Canada, which is also under the full control of the UN/WEF. Learn all about our UN masters from our CONSTITUTION/CHARTER FRAUD Series #3 and UN INVASION Series #1 starting with Part 1.

The reference to Compute Ontario is actually a reference to the globalist ORION’s subsidiary set up in 2014. See here (archived here). Take note that Compute Ontario is the corporation setting up the SMART-city databases in Ontario.

The word ‘Ontario’ is used in all these corporate names to make the public think all this theft of our private information and data is spearheaded by the ‘government’, when it is entirely the project of the UN corporations and agencies. The term ‘partnership with Province of Ontario’ is to distract from the fact the Province is simply giving away taxpayer dollars to set up and fund these foreign-controlled corporations enslaving us. Once these start-ups are ready, the whole shebang is transferred to private control.

SMART City Network is the centrepiece of the UN world governance apparatus, and part of that is the establishment of 15-minute cities to control travel and life in general. SMART Cities will control all you do and all you are. See here the Province of Ontario plans, involving Compute Ontario, titled ‘Building Ontario’s Next Generation Smart Cities Through Data Governance Part 4: The Future of Ontario’s Data Fulfilling the potential of SMARTcities’.

We can’t say they don’t tell us, can we? Our complacency is not their fault!

Canada’s intelligence service warns that technological innovations adopted by municipalities could be exploited by adversaries such as the Chinese government to harvest sensitive data, target diaspora communities and interfere in elections. See here (archived here) the warning.

The 5G Networks are central to the function of the SMART City Network and 15-minute cities, because without data about every single thing you do and think, you cannot be controlled. This is especially true about your financial information and spending. It is important to learn far more about 5G, 6G and even 10G installations from our 5G KILL SHOT Series.

A Kemptville, Nova Scotia resident uncovered the many planned 15-minute cities that neighboring councils have quietly signed up (archived here) to enslave and control their residents. Meanwhile, Canada’s capital is littered with 15-minute ‘neighbourhoods’, as SMART cities are now deceptively called.

As everything you do and own in life is monitored by Artificial Technology and data systems shared world-wide by globalist corporations, they talk openly about ‘data governance’. The excerpt below is from a report titled “Building Ontario’s Next-Generation Smart Cities Through Data Governance,” published in November 2019. The report was a collaborative effort co-authored by Compute Ontario and ORION (Ontario Research and Innovation Optical Network), following funding from the Government of Ontario to study smart cities and data privacy.

“Central to the discussion of data governance is the understanding that the type of data and its intended use drives the degree of complexity embedded in a model. But smart city data is highly diverse and can be used for many purposes by multiple stakeholders– which makes it difficult, and perhaps impossible, to prescribe one single data governance framework. While the principles-based model is not complex, this examination of data governance also suggests that principles play a critical role in establishing a positive data culture and in creating the foundation for more complex governance models.
Furthermore, principles can play an essential role in establishing criteria for regulation and the enforceability of law …”

The passage from that report highlights a major hurdle for policymakers: because a "smart city" collects everything from traffic camera footage and environmental sensor logs to personal healthcare data, you cannot treat all data with a single blanket policy. The sheer variety of stakeholders—ranging from everyday citizens and private tech contractors to municipal governments—means that data governance must be adaptive and layered, rather than a "one-size-fits-all" framework.

Step 1 is data collection

Step 2 is data governance (note the reference to multiple stakeholders, indicating that ‘governance’ will be a free-for-all)

Step 3 is data ‘trusts’

Step 4 is making all this illegality and privacy violation (enslavement) legal.

Now that they’ve captured all your private information and data property, who is going to be in charge of sharing, selling and administering YOUR property from now on?

The entire library of the Ontario Compute-Orion project’s case studies can be found at these official ORION links:

Direct PDF Link: You can read the specific paper containing the quote above and the one below via the ORION Final Synthesis Report PDF.
Full Report Series Hub: If you want to explore the individual case studies mentioned in the text (such as the health data trust, personal mobility, and open data architecture components), they are all listed under the “Reports” archive on the ORION Publications Page.

“At the SCGL the main components of a legal data trust, as well as the risks and opportunities associated with their use, were outlined. 43 The notion of a ‘trust’ has a long history, introduced in 1066 when the king of England granted land ownership to feudal lords, trusting that those lords would provide military support in times of need.
It evolved to encompass community land trusts, and subsequently to include other classes of assets, including financial. In a legal trust, a grantor puts an asset into a trust, which gives control of the asset to a trustee for a defined purpose, on behalf of a beneficiary. Accepting the view that data is property, this concept provides the legal foundation on which it may be possible to build new approaches to manage data better. A trust promises many advantages. It is based on the asset as opposed to organizational governance; it creates legally enforceable fiduciary duties; it provides oversight for managing various governance requirements; and may be global in reach. As a legal construct, the data trust supersedes the collective holding of assets, and hence may be used to regulate data sharing. …
Emerging models of data trust approximate to a legal trust, incorporating attributes of the trustee beneficiary relationships while avoiding some of its restrictive features. The Open Data Institute in the United Kingdom, a recognized leader in the area of open data governance, defines this sort of data trust as “an intermediary between data providers, data users, and other stakeholders in the sharing and use of data. Its central task is to enable data providers and users to share, access, and use data, consistent and confidently while maintaining robust systems to identify and mitigate risk.”
~ Building Ontario's Next-Generation Smart Cities Through Data Governance--Part 4: The Future of Ontario's Data (the final synthesis report published by Compute Ontario and ORION in November 2019). It appears in the section introducing "Data Governance Models" and "Defining the Data Trust" (around pages 25–27), the authors explain the historical origin of the legal concept of a "trust" before adapting it to modern data sharing. In this part of the report, the authors are recapping the legal overview presented at the SCGL (Smart Cities Governance Lab) workshop held in Kitchener-Waterloo.

[We have in past articles explained the Cestui que Trusts that have enslaved humanity for over 1,000 years that are still very much in effect today. DATA TRUSTs are simply an extension of these Cestui que Trusts and are modelled after them. The footnote reference (43) points to the historical background they used to frame the concept: the legal framework of a “trust” wasn’t invented for technology; it dates back to English common law roots (specifically tracing back to the Norman Conquest in 1066 and the subsequent evolution of feudal land law and “uses”). The report uses this history to explain how an old legal mechanism—where one party holds property or rights on behalf of and for the benefit of another—is being repurposed today to protect citizen privacy through modern “Data Trusts.”]

As humanity has seen since 1066, one NEVER GETS THEIR PROPERTY BACK. It’s a ruse FORCED on the public by corporations disguised as ‘government’, just as are pensions. Notice how there is not a single reference to the rightful owner of that data that they have appropriated for their profiteering schemes…it’s all about how to share it to make money from the theft.

As you can learn from our special document about Cestui que Trusts in the subsection titled ‘There are no private property rights in Canada – that is a fact!‘ you realize they were installed over 1,000 years ago to steal property, all sorts of property. One thousand years later, you have all this modern ‘property’ they didn’t have 1000 years ago, and now these trusts have expanded to steal not just your name, body and soul, but your private data and information, which makes you 100% captured as a commodity under globalist corporate control.

How will they get around the Privacy legislation you might wonder? Answer: the same way the government does everything, they simple change the legislation, tell us they have the ‘authority’ to make all actions ‘legal’ and provide no recourse or tolerate any challenges. From the same Compute Ontario-Orion report:

“Consider regulatory amendments to the Municipal Freedom of Information and Protection of Privacy Act (MFIPPA) in order to allow the use of provincial health data for municipal system planning and evaluation; …”

The mainstream media, as you can see from a CTV Edmonton News Report, once characterized 15-minute cities as a conspiracy theory; CTV is now covering the very Edmonton council plans for over fifteen 15-minute cities being installed in Edmonton, Alberta, that it previously ridiculed.

Learn more about how the CTV News Channel can no longer call 15-minute city discussions and warnings ‘conspiracy theories’ but still continues to promote the idea of unnecessary alarmism, here (archived here).

When Adult Children Want to Take Parent’s Home, the Courts Oblige

MARK OUR WORDS! Adult children will use MAiD to off parents for the inheritances. We already know how many seniors are treated by greedy adult children, and we can expect to hear of many cases like this in the coming days. To keep abreast of how ‘liberal’ the approvals for medical-assisted suicide have become check our MEDICAL MURDER Series. There you will see examples of how, even when an individual changes their mind, they are killed quickly and their organs harvested.

In this April 7, 2026 video, you learn how a daughter arranged for her 102-year-old father to be taken from his home in Tillsonburg, Ontario. Mercifully, his son stood between him and the OPP who showed up with a court order to remove him from his own home, on the say-so of the daughter.

Son: “Not opening the door. Break it if you have a warrant. It’s under appeal.” (Judges have far too much power – now they are providing court orders to remove elderly people from their homes on the say-so of adult children!)

The father is clear: he’ll die where he chooses. He sounds clear and rational. (Apparently you are clear and rational if you agree to be medically-murdered, but not if you insist on staying in your own home.)

The dispute? Sister wants the farm. Father wants to stay - HE OWNS THE FARM. She alleges dementia, son says he is clear and rational.

Police are caught in the middle. They are trying to enforce a Thursday night Court Order on Good Friday with no time for legal response by the father – that is major ‘dirty’ on the part of all involved. As is making an elderly man hire a $500/hour lawyer to protect his right not to end up a MAiD victim or to have his farm taken out from under him.

Result of son saying NO!: the officers leave because they are not going to kick down the door and the son knows it.

The son also says he doesn’t trust the police or the courts. No one should if they go along with ambush and property theft under the pretext of the owner being demented. Whether they are demented or not, he should have a right to life and to his farm.

Digital ID Reduces Everyone to a Faceless Data Point with NO Rights

Warning: Digital ID makes the recovery of one’s name, control of body and mind, and all property impossible. Once the ‘data genie’ is out of the bottle, it is too late to recover what is yours.

Financial analyst George Gammon explains (archived here) how globalists plan to take your BANK ACCOUNTS, CHILDREN, RRSPs, PENSIONS, ARTWORK, VEHICLES, PETS…

A 2016 blog post about a vision for 2030 on the World Economic Forum’s site revealed that artificial intelligence (AI) will and has already been recording everything that an individual does, thinks and dreams.

Homes are being seized by the government and energy usage is being allocated using SMART meter AI algorithms based on central-bank digital-currency (CBDC) transactions. Cash is being eliminated.

The goal is for individuals to own nothing and globalists to control everything, including rain, water consumption and even sunlight (Bill Gates is already dimming the sun). Gammon describes multiple strategies that are already being used to confiscate private property without force.

Especially during the COVID lockdowns, Big Tech companies were furiously and secretly installing 5G towers everywhere, including on schools and hospitals. This grid is essential to being able to control EVERYTHING. If you cannot control your own property, you have nothing, even if you happen to be using it or living in it. See a good video explanation here.

Digital ID involves every human being fully controlled by the United Nations and central banks. The installation of 5G systems makes this massive control and surveillance system possible, so see our upcoming 5G KILL SHOT page for details about how our bodies, which were our 2^nd most important property after our minds, became ‘antennae’ and ‘transmitters’ of electromagnetic impulses without our knowledge or consent. See here to learn how Digital ID works before it’s too late.

Do you have 8 minutes to spare? These next 8 minutes will make it clear why we are forced into a digital economy facilitated by the 5G grid. Dr. Vandana Shiva explains how Digital Robber Barons are recolonizing our bodies -- which are our private property -- using invasive technologies, here …then you will understand why they wanted everyone vaccinated with mRNA technologies. You won’t be sorry you spent the time.

The World Economic Forum (WEF) has had a ‘Blueprint for Digital Identity’ for decades and the COVID lockdowns were used to further implement the plans in secret.

The WEF created a report outlining exactly what businesses around the world would be forced to do if they wanted to continue in the world of commerce controlled solely by the WEF and the World Bank. In other words, YOUR business and livelihood are not your property … the WEF is taking possession of them.

The mandate of the Digital ID project was to drive home the role that financial institutions should play in building a global standard for digital identity and an erasure of your human ID. The WEF’s directive titled ‘A Blueprint for Digital Identity’ by Deloitte involves central banks and traitor subject matter experts as explained here.

During the Trucker Convoy 2022 event, we learned how banks can control every aspect of our lives, own our bank accounts and the money in it, and hold us hostage if we do not abide their treason. Unashamedly, they seize the very property you thought was yours…without court order or any authorization. With Digital ID, you will not even get to eat unless they want you to. Making a living, having children, owning a car will all be privileges if you are their digital slave.

Digital ID and microchipping will put you into a prison from which you can never escape. It is not convenient for YOU, it is convenient for the WEF and World Bank behind this enslavement. Your entire life, private property, including mind and body, will be controlled by computers.

Under the climate change hoax, ‘Net Zero’ is a new strategy to get rid of small farmers first through ‘digital farming’ and ‘farming without farmers’. Once small farmers are burdened by carbon accounting they will be forced out of agriculture, decades of wisdom and knowledge will be lost and the population will starve. Learn more about the Net Zero hoax on our CLIMATE CHANGE HOAX page.
BlackRock and other shady globalist corporations are buying up single-family dwellings at alarming rates, as you learn here. The embedded video is preserved here.
Carbon offsets and the creative accounting called ‘net zero’ does not mean zero emissions. It means the rich polluters will continue to pollute, while simultaneously grabbing the land and resources of those who have not polluted — the ‘so-called’ indigenous people and small farmers, all of which will be mandated to have Digital ID, with all of their property and equipment microchipped for remote control. This is all for “for carbon offsets” and to protect the earth, or so they say.

Where are they storing the quadrillion points of data that they are collecting? That’s where the AI Data Centres come in. You must have noticed how suddenly, in the last couple of years, the government is allowing hundreds of data centres to be built on farmland, practically all at once.

Without these AI data centres to access and control all the data collected, they cannot create their 15-minute cities and totalitarian surveillance networks. They cannot control the millions of nanorobots already developed and injected into compliant individuals.

In this video (archived here) the Nanorobot Inventor Explains How the DNA Nanorobots injected into your body work, and how every syringe contains hundreds of millions of autonomous nanorobots.

Listen carefully.

That’s inventor Ido Bachelet below, holding one syringe containing hundreds of millions of nanorobots that can deliver any payload of any substance or technolocy into your cells once you are injected.

The AI prisons are here: they are functioning as planned and designed. Meanwhile we are sold sports, and entertainment as a distraction from the war happening all around us. The media uses the most deceptive of language.

In this MUST READ Substack, you learn how fast AI Data Centre building has progressed because the 2030 deadline is fast approaching to complete the UN/World Government Agenda 2030 that guarantees you will own nothing and you will be disposed of very quickly as they decide who is the ‘useless eater’. Think we are crazy? Canada has already medically-murdered over 100,000 Canadians that they first tortured by refusing proper medical treatment. Hundreds of small farming communities are fighting municipal agreements with DATA CENTRE builders…these are the final part of the digital ID infrastructure.

Few people realize that firearms for hunting and protection are important ‘private property’. Justin Trudeau’s January 2023 multi-million dollar pilot program to go door-to-door in Prince Edward Island to confiscate legally acquired firearms has fallen flat on it’s face, showing that when people stand and fight together, they can win at least one battle in the larger war.

Corrupt Minister Marco Mendicino failed to get participation from the RCMP and private firms to carry out these orders. Trudeau’s P.E.I. Pilot Firearm Confiscation Program was therefore CANCELED. More attempts were made but resisted.

First, the guns were lawfully purchased, and not from the government, so the use of the term ‘buy-back’ is fraudulent and misleading – but typical of communist operators disguised as Canadians.

Secondly, there is only one reason to target lawful gun owners and not do a thing about the gun-running of illegal arms into Canada by organized crime – to create chaos and a lawless, dangerous society where the population will accept tyranny in hopes of getting a bit of protection.

You Ready to Lose your Secondary Home or Cottage?

The following should concern you if you own a secondary home or cottage.

This video shows the Canadian Federal Government was planning in November 2023, to ‘buy back’ (seize) private property and secondary homes that the government sees used as short-term rentals. They will be repurposed to house the millions of homeless and immigrants the government has allowed in and is planning to allow into the country in coming years! You will own what they allow you to own. This is communism raw.

Further, the government intends to use the federal system of taxation to coerce property owners into using their properties as the government wishes them to. The municipalities are already doing this with the Vacancy Tax.

The sole purpose of taxes was to fund the government so it could provide Canadians with services ‘at cost’. Now, taxes are used as weapons to force behavior they want and these weapons were put in place in 2012 when the Municipal Act, 2001 was amended to allow municipalities to use the Vacancy Tax to punish those who do not turn over their free space into ‘housing’.

Now, the federal government is getting in on the overt seizing of property – homes, guns, vehicles, etc.

As the municipalities in Ontario, Manitoba and BC are stealing private properties with one false, unjustified pretext after another, the Ontario Superior Court judges ensure there is no procedural fairness whatever. They even provide the municipalities and their lawyers opportunities to add new pleadings after the trial is complete and final submissions have been made.

In our LEGAL FRAUD series, we discuss recent Ontario cases where unjustified searches by building inspectors, home invasions by planners, theft of building materials by property standards officers, and rezoning and conservation easements are all protected by one judicial ‘discretionary decision’ after another.

Since PAWS took over enforcement duties from the Ontario Society of Prevention of Cruelty to Animals in 2019, their staff have started to remove cattle and other livestock from commercial farm operations. Not because the cattle were neglected or abused in any way … but because private organization PAWS now has the authority to dictate everything that happens on a property, to steal that property from the rightful owner and to put him/her through the nightmare called ‘the legal system’.

Interestingly the Canada-wide organization now claims on its website ‘We are not involved in policing or investigating animal abuse! Call Provincial Animal Welfare Services 1-833-926-4625. In an emergency, call 911.” It has been difficult to learn the connection between the Ontario PAWS and the Canada-wide ‘charity’ PAWS.

The split between the Ontario and Canada PAWS organizations could have to do with the scandal that erupted over the death of 2 cattle for no good reason.

Privately-owned Corporations Terrorize Farmers and Private Property Owners

A Peterborough, Ontario, beef farmer felt the sting of injustice with the removal of his cattle under the Welfare Services Act. PAWS scooped up more than half his herd after he failed to comply with orders to clean up what PAWS decided was “hazardous debris” on parts of the property a month earlier.

The herd had run free over the 200 acres for years, Landowner Voices reported in their January-February 2022 edition, referring to the December 16, 2021 roundup of the cattle by a contractor hired by PAWS that was timed just before Christmas to make sure the stress and hardship is impactful as possible.

In that case PAWS was alleged to have stolen a farmer’s cattle using its broad enforcement powers, killing two in the process, without ever having to lay a charge of animal abuse or neglect. No due process.

“PAWS investigators “are supposed to be the elite of the cattle industry, and to me, they’re the absolute worst,” Ray said, his voice momentarily breaking with emotion, when answering Scriven’s questions during testimony March 28. “They just terrorized that herd” ~ The Nelson Zandbergen Farmers Forum

Few who have had to deal with these ‘agencies’ and their ‘contractors’ have not noticed how property standards and animal welfare enforcements enrich opportunistic ‘contractors’.

Ray, the cattle owner, testified he felt as if he was being “robbed” (in fact theft, even legalized theft, is still theft!) when PAWS and its contractor arrived to take the animals. The contractor used two ATVs in an attempt to wrangle more than 170 head at the Ray farm. The effort only managed to collect 101, with two animals dying and an injured contractor who spent a number of weeks in hospital. “You’ll never load cattle that way,” Beef Farmers of Ontario animal advisory councillor John Lunn testified March 28. See the story here, being an Ontario Landowner Association (OLA) article published June 2022.

If it isn’t private corporations masquerading as ‘animal protection’ societies stealing cattle and destroying a farmer’s livelihood, it is the Canadian government seizing prime farmland just north of Toronto to install a specialized radar system. It has to be on prime farmland you see, because the main purpose for putting it where our food is grown is so that we cannot grow our own food and will be forced to eat the garbage grown in Asia.

In this excellent video explanation by Harrison Faulkner, 700 acres of prime Ontario farmland has already been seized with another 2,000 in the process of being seized. Because stupid Canadians think this doesn’t affect them, these farmlands will be turned into military defence holdings and we will starve. That is full-blown communism at the hands of a main World Government puppet, Mark Carney.

In 2012 the Department of Defence seized 222 acres of the Frank Meyer family’s prime farmland in Quinte West, Ontario under the pretext of wanting to expand the Canadian Forces Base (CFB) Trenton, to serve as the new headquarters for Joint Task Force 2 (JTF-2), Canada’s elite special forces unit. Meyers, who was in his 80s at the time, fought the expropriation for seven years. His family had held the land since 1798.

Meyer’s struggle against the federal government gained significant media attention. A major point of contention was the impact on his operations. Reports at the time highlighted how the military presence and the nature of the project disrupted his ability to access his fields and continue his multi-generational farming legacy, eventually leading to a tense standoff that involved military police and drew significant public and media support.

Despite his efforts, Meyers eventually surrendered the property in late 2012 after the government threatened arbitration that could have significantly reduced his compensation. The story became a symbol of the conflict between individual property rights and federal “national security” requirements of an out-of-control communist regime.

Frank Meyers passed away in 2019 at the age of 92. Even in his final years, he remained a symbol of the struggle for land rights, having never accepted the government’s compensation cheques.

That’s the face of a Canadian with more courage and foresight in his baby finger than all Canadian politicians and lawyers have in their entire bodies put together.

The land itself became a point of uncertainty for some time after the expropriation. For years, the site sat largely vacant—the barns were demolished and the fields were left empty—as the federal government re-evaluated its plans for the Joint Task Force 2 (JTF-2) facility. This irony was often noted by his supporters, who compared it to the long-standing uncertainty of the Pickering Airport lands.

Then there was the fictitious federal corporate government ‘expropriation’ for an airport in Pickering. In 1972, the federal government expropriated 18,600 acres of land in Pickering, Ontario, for a proposed airport. This act did split many farms in half and rendered parts of them inaccessible or unworkable for decades. And yes, they were prime production lands.

This remains one of the most famous examples of government land seizure in Canadian history, and there have been news reports about this specific issue for over 50 years.

If we had revolted then to protect this prime farmland, we would not be looking at the food crisis that is just around the corner right now.

Don’t forget ALTO High Speed Railroad from Quebec City to Toronto that is expropriating 22,000 acres of land, mostly communities, 1400 + private properties and farms, at a cost to taxpayers of $200+ billion.

All the bush in Canada and the government wants the farmland. This should make you think if you awaken in time.

When governments can bypass the principle of “just compensation” or change land-use rules at will, the barrier between a liberal democracy and a state with near-total control over private resources begins to thin. If ownership is conditional—depending entirely on the government’s current policy—then true ownership does not exist, only a form of long-term lease from the state.

The “Frank Meyers” case was not just an isolated dispute; it was a visible warning sign of a system where the individual is structurally disadvantaged when facing the state. Our system is supposed to be one where the government is the servant…in a communist system, the government is the master. Need we prove more?

Car Ownership for Serfs? No Way Says Schwab!

“You will own nothing and you will be happy!”

Klaus Schwab of the World Economic Forum (WEF) has called for an end to ‘wasteful’ private car ownership (archived here). “The globalist elites say too many people own private vehicles for the planet’s good”.

Meanwhile private jets, unbelievable yachts, multi-million-dollar mansions, limousines and motorcades for the “elite”, are all perfectly normal and necessary. After all, they are the RULERS!

Absurd vehicle safety standards are preventing the common people from repairing or driving their vehicles – a little rust and suddenly one cannot sell their vehicle, drive the vehicle and are forced to buy brand new electric or electric hybrids.

In April 2022, the Ontario government pushed through Bill 100 that allows the government to seize cars, houses and other private property WITHOUT A TRIAL. See here (archived here).

“Ontario’s Bill 100 presents a grave danger to democracy and Charter Rights in Ontario, said Rick Nicholls MPP from a letter that he read yesterday: it gives the govt the power to seize property (your house, car, etc.) without a hearing or trial for exercising your guaranteed right to freedom of speech and assembly, that is, for merely protesting. Guilty until proven innocent and unable to speak out against the govt.
Ontario MPP Rick Nicholls questions Solicitor General Sylvia Jones on the chilling bill in which “tyranny will literally become the new norm.”

Only MPP Rick Nichols voting against Bill 100– remember that the next time that you think that political party systems are healthy for any nation.

As soon as you register your motor vehicle, your motor vehicle gets a ‘tag’, a LICENCE plate which is owned by the Crown, as confirmed in the Highway Traffic Act (HTA) of Ontario.

From our upcoming LICENCING FRAUD Series (Section: Licencing has nothing to do with competent driving) you will learn that the instant you buy the vehicle plates and attach them to your vehicle, which you are coerced to do under duress of being arrested for not having your car plated, the corporate QUEEN owns the plate and everything attached to it. The series explains the provision in the Highway Traffic Act that turns you into a legally-owned entity by distorting your name, as described in our NAME THEFT Series, and then having that legally-owned entity controlled by the HTA.

Highway Traffic Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. H.8

Property of the Crown
12 (2) Every number plate is the property of the Crown and shall be returned to the Ministry when required by the Registrar. 1999, c. 12, Sched. R, s. 5 (1); 2017, c. 9, s. 2 (1).
Notice to plate holder
12 (2.1) The Registrar may cause notice to be given to the holder of a number plate that the number plate is required to be returned to the Ministry. 2017, c. 9, s. 2 (2).
No plate, no driving on public highways.

Crowdfunding Donations Now Considered Money-laundering

Even though YOUR donations to crowdfunding platforms are YOUR property from your own private bank account, on April 29, 2022, the government announced that crowdfunding platforms have been added to anti-money laundering legislation (archived here) allowing the government to seize bank accounts and donations with trumped up allegations of money-laundering anytime the public tries to protest government tyranny.

As the name suggests, crowdfunding is the practice of funding projects through donations or financial contributions from the public. Traditional fundraising methods depend on institutional investors, like banks, and are regulated by federal and provincial laws. By contrast, crowdfunding platforms allow individuals or groups to launch campaigns that appeal directly to donors or investors.

Pension Funds Emptied

PENSION FUNDS ALREADY FLOWED DOWNHILL TO THE Chinese Communist Party controlled, and now collapsed, real estate development industry. The funds are empty, despite all the marketing.

All pensions have been stolen by global elite and the principle will never be paid back, according to financial experts in 2022. Please see our upcoming PENSION FRAUD Series to learn the reason contributing to a pension was mandatory, just as they made paying illegal income tax mandatory. The long-range plan was to steal pension funds last, just before communism was fully installed. See a good video here for more details.

Owning Property is Now a Barren Right in Canada

If the right of use of one’s own property is denied, the property is effectively lost. One way to lose right to use of own’s own body and mind as private property, is by mRNA vaccine gene-editing and modification.

NOTE: The agenda of the elites is to legally own humanity as ‘livestock’. Of course, slavery is against GOD’s laws (unlawful), but man’s legal system has been creating slavery for centuries through legal codes, legislation, regulations and now patents and DNA changes.

During a historic Grand Jury proceeding in February 2022, expert eye-witnesses testified about the official agenda of the elites to genetically modify and copyright humanity, so they would no longer belong to the Creator, but become their legal property.

One of these witnesses was Alex Thomson, a former officer of Britain’s Signal Intelligence Agency--GCHQ, the partner agency to NSA (National Security Agency, USA). He was a desk officer for the former Soviet Union and a transcriber of intercepted material. Thomson was part of GCHQ’s cross disciplinary team for chemical, biological, radiological and nuclear threats: CBRN.

An individual’s body and mind, and everything in it, becomes the property of the patent holder of the mRNA device injected as a COVID vaccine.

Why were mRNA vaccines designed to alter your DNA? To make you legal property! Once altered, the new DNA makes you a novel creation. The creator of that novel creation gets to patent and monetize it.

Spanish physician Dr. Chinda Brandolino explains that according to a Supreme Court ruling from 2013 a person whose DNA has been modified is patented and in fact has become the property of the patent holder of that DNA modification technology. Furthermore, they are no longer legally human but are considered trans-human meaning that existing human rights do not apply to them. See the document and many excellent video explanations here (archived here).

In the first video seen at that linked Stop World Control website, you can see Bill Gates and Mark Zuckerberg admit that the COVID vaccines modify the human DNA. You will also hear from Dr. Carrie Madej how this is part of the transhumanist agenda to create a new breed of people, Human 2.0. When you scroll down, you will learn how genetically-edited people become property of the patent holder of the technology used to edit their genome.

When your DNA is modified, you are the private property of the patent holder – and can be bought, sold, leased, destroyed and disposed of at will. See here how a censored study proved that mRNA shots permanently alter the DNA of the vaccinated and their offspring.

In the case cited as ASSOCIATION FOR MOLECULAR PATHOLOGY ET AL. v. MYRIAD GENETICS, INC., ET AL., 2013, the Supreme Court of United States ruled that human DNA cannot be patented because it is ‘a product of nature’. But at the end of the ruling, the Supreme Court ruled that if a human genome were changed by mRNA vaccines (which are currently being used), then the genome can be patented.

This means that all people who have received the mRNA vaccine are now officially ‘patented’ and something that is patented is ‘property’ and will fall under the definition of ‘trans-human’. Those people who are legally identified as ‘trans-humans’ do not have access to Human Rights or any rights granted by the State. This is because they are not classified as 100% organic or human. Therefore, technically anyone who has taken this vaccine could no longer have access to Human Rights.

As one of the videos offered at the link provided above explains, patent holders of gene editing technology claim ownership of people whose DNA is modified with their technology. This is already done with plants and animals that have been genetically modified. This could be used to enforce compliance in future tyrannical vaccine and mass treatment mandates, just as the courts upheld that Monsanto owned all GM corn, wheat and other franken-plants and could win ‘damages’ if they were found on someone’s property who had not paid for the GM seed.

There are Three in Your Marriage

Did you know that getting a marriage licence makes the government a partner in the marriage and gives it a right to the children of the marriage?

What Is a Marriage License?

A marriage license is a legal document obtained by a couple prior to marriage. Once the licence is signed (during or after your ceremony) and returned by an officiant to the county, a marriage certificate is issued.

As we’ve discussed in our NAME THEFT Series, a certificate is a ‘security’ and the issuer of the ‘security’ owns it and can trade, sell or dispose of it as they wish. The product (children) of that marriage is attached to the certificate, just as investment income is attached to a stock certificate.

All legislation is about dignifying fraud, extortion, theft and so on, and it works as long as we think that a corporation writing ‘laws’ for humans is an acceptable arrangement.

Also, please let us know if any of our hyperlinks have stopped working so that we can fix them. Thank you.

People-United
people-united.ca

Subscribe now

Tip via Kofi/Stripe

E-transfer tips within Canada:
ADMIN-PU@proton.me

Series #2 PROPERTY THEFT Part 16A - Other Property Stolen

People-United Uncensored — Thu, 02 Jul 2026 13:36:17 GMT

In this first part of two, we delve into the many other private property items that the government and their corporate buddies steal from us without our realizing it -- cars, pensions, firearms, bank accounts, 2^nd homes, cottages, our given names, livestock, pets and children, private data and your unique ID. What about our Private information?

Any and All Property in Canada Can Be Seized Without Due Process

The fire-arms ban case cited as Parker v. Canada (Attorney General), 2023 FC 1419 (CanLII) (archived here) has resulted in a Federal Court Judge Kane deciding that ALL PROPERTY in Canada can be seized by government, without justification or due process. Any and all property can be seized by an Order in Council (OIC), which in Canada is 100% fictitious since there is no legitimate government, only corporations masquerading as governments.

OIC’s are fiat ‘orders’: fiat means because they say so or want to.

From a summary (archived here) by one of the professional associations involved in the case:

“The case is precedent setting for private property ownership in Canada, confirming that with little to no justification, the Government can ban via OIC any private property that in their opinion is unfit for public ownership. Most alarmingly, and perhaps very telling of the state of Government in our country, Judge Kane specifically stated in her ruling that “The Governor in Council does not owe a duty of procedural fairness to individual firearms owners who may be affected by the Governor in Councils exercise of its authority to prescribe firearms as prohibited”.
Understand that statement – they owe you no duty of procedural fairness. Now replace firearms owner with “combustion engine vehicle owner” or “sport motorcycle owner” or even “gas stove or fireplace owner”.
The ruling sets precedent for Government to reach into your home, and based on their judgement and ideological agenda, ban your property via OIC. If nothing else, the fear now is that the Government can follow up this May 2020 OIC, and use that same mechanism to ban other firearms, such as use of semi-automatic long guns, or long-range precision rifles (long guns with scopes or bipods) etc etc.
They owe you NO procedural fairness and will act in the best interests of their party and ideology to secure votes.”

See more here by Firearms Rights about this unjustified decision by the fraudulent Federal Court. We can say fraudulent court because there has been no legal federal government and therefore no legal federal ‘court’ in Canada since 1931. Review the CONSTITUTION-CHARTER FRAUD Series #3 for proof.

In addition, the Department of Justice has had its request for a Section 39 exemption granted in the Order in Council (OIC) court case. As a result, the federal government will not have to show the court the evidence (archived here) it used to ban firearms in the May, 2020 gun control crackdown. Similarly, this exemption will be applied every time they seized someone’s home, children, farms, etc.

Yes, they could have appealed these decisions to the Supreme Court of Canada but remember 7 of the 9 Justices are Liberal appointees.

These violations of fundamental human rights are always a slippery slope. Today it’s firearms and the taking of children to ‘transgender’ them without parental consent, tomorrow it’s euthanizing ‘useless eaters’ instead of providing essential healthcare treatments and essentials of life. Oh, wait, they already are doing the latter!

For those who think we are all better off without guns…digest this:

Public Safety Canada has no evidence gun ban will reduce crime, improve public safety

“Ottawa is preparing the largest public safety confiscation program in history, and apparently nobody inside Public Safety Canada bothered to produce evidence. That alone should nuke the program.”
~ Sheila Gunn Reid, Rebel News report May 13, 2026

According to Gunn Reid’s report:

“Ottawa is preparing the largest public safety confiscation program in history, and apparently nobody inside Public Safety Canada bothered to produce evidence,” she said. “That alone should nuke the program.”
With the Liberals already committed to spending at least $742 million on the gun grab, by their own admission in Budget 2025, the Fraser Institute found the program could lead to a $6 billion “fiasco” when factoring in assorted costs.
“Think about how insane that is, if the government cannot justify a multibillion dollar, then what are Canadians paying for exactly?”

History has repeatedly made it clear what we are paying for… the next massacre of an entire population. Just in case you missed this history lesson:

And who is behind all this?

They Even Steal Your Given Name!

We are presuming here, that your momma did not name you comma, correct? Yet, most corporations have added a comma to your birth name after distorting it…for example: DOE, John.

This theft of our given (birth) names is a huge topic and probably the most egregious, stealth crime against humanity ever known. It is the root of all other enslaving actions of the elite. Our birth names are private property – they stole them!

We have dedicated an entire Series titled NAME THEFT to explain how it all happened, who did it to us and why. For now, read the transcript of the testimony of the Ontario Deputy Registrar of Vital Statistics, Judith Hartman, at the Ontario Human Rights Tribunal in the case cited as XY vs. Ontario (Government and Consumer Services), 2012 HRTO 726. The Tribunal Decision is here.

Judith (Judi) Hartman runs the Ontario Vital Statistics office where births, deaths, marriages (life events) are records. She explains under oath, how your given name and RECORD of Live Birth gets turned into a government certificate, after which it is fully available to ‘businesses’ downstream of the Registrar of Vital Statistics.

Part 1 of 2 of the transcript is here. Part 2 of 2 of the transcript is here.

Pay close attention to the double speak and trick words in that testimony:

Not once was Hartman asked why it had to be a ‘certificate’ number, instead of just a case or record #, given that a ‘certificate’ in law is a security that can be and is usually monetized.

Ms. Hartman did not refer to men and women, but to ‘persons’ and ‘subjects’.
Ms. Hartman stated clearly that the Birth Certificate proves nothing...does not identify the individual associated to it, does not provide addresses. All the Birth Certificate does is provide data for many different government datasets having nothing to do with men and women. And DATA is a commodity, worth billions.
Not once did she refer to the parents as ‘stakeholders’ or why they are not fully informed about what applying for a birth certificate really means: their child’s given name and particulars (their private property) are being commoditized, complete with a certificate (security).
Note how they equate a live birth, with a transgender event. The transgender event was not a birth, but the transgender event is treated as the true birth event. The actual birth of the individual who later (long after birth) decided to become transgendered is erased and replaced by particulars of a later transgender event. They do not deal with what happens if the transgendered decides the original birth and sex was correct all along and want it back? Most people understand that we are only born once…yet transgendered appear to be able to be born as often as they wish.
Why was she not asked why the name on the Birth Certificate is in all caps, with a comma, and a distorted version of the birth (given) name (Statement of Live Birth) if they are not interested in keeping track of humans in their datasets?
And why did the Statement of Live Birth record have to be transformed into a certificate or even a registered document…why could they not just continue to record and build data sets from the Statements of Live Birth? [because our private information is used to create commodities with names that look like our human names.]

Notice that she states they don’t keep track of individual (human birth) names, but they give their certificates individual names. They DO NOT give the security certificates a human name -- they give the certificates a fictitious legal entity name. By using the term ‘individual’ the way we commonly speak so that she appears to be talking about each certificate getting a name, she hides that the certificate does not have an ‘individual’s’ name, but a fictitious legal entity’s name. Then you spend your entire life thinking that you are the government-issued name on the certificate security! A truthful public servant would say that they ‘give each individual certificate a legal entity name’.

If you think that the Birth Certificate is not part of the corporation’s business and that they don’t collect your personal information to pass on to other businesses to do as they wish with the data, take a look at this from page 29 of the Hartman transcript:

Let’s take a look at just how this theft of our given names operate in the commercial world (you know, that world of fiction that treats us like data points and commodities).

Absolutely must watch (archived here) a Power Point presentation regarding how your Given Name was turned into a Trade Name/Strawman that you unwittingly take responsibility for every time you sign your given name on a negotiable instrument, such as a personal cheque.

Note: the video uses American UCC Code provisions to explain how we are tricked and explains the correct way to sign one’s name. However, the same principles generally apply across Canada for all but Article 3 of the UCC.

In common law states, such as Canada’s provinces (except Quebec), the PPSA (Personal Property Security Act) is comparable to the UCC, except regarding UCC Article 3, but varies from nation-State (former ‘province’ before 1931). The principles are the same and the nation-States’ (formerly provinces’) unique PPSAs were modeled after the UCC especially the UCC’s Article 9.

We will get back to the difference between the Canadian PPSA and American UCC in a moment but first, let’s deal with the subject of the video, UCC Article 3 (UCC-3).

Article 3 of the UCC sets out in American law how an individual can avoid being tricked into taking responsibility for the tradename/legal entity/strawman assigned to them by government and corporations.

The comparable in Canadian law to the UCC Article 3 which is the subject of the video is NOT the PPSA, but the federal Bills of Exchange Act, 1985.

**NOTE: there is no definition in the Act of ‘person’, no mention of ‘natural person’ or ‘individual’ or ‘private person’, so this is a commercial document regulating commerce between ‘persons’ where ‘persons are corporations, associations, etc’ THIS IS IMPORTANT BECAUSE AS YOU LEARNED FROM Part 3, ‘person’ is not a man or women, a natural person or an individual unless the statute specifically defines ‘person’ and makes reference to men and women.

Black’s Law Dictionary 10^th Edition:

To confirm that ‘person’ in the Bills of Exchange Act does not include ‘men, women, natural persons and individuals’ see s. 188, which makes a clear distinction:

Bills of Exchange Act, 1985

Definitions
188 In this Part,
consumer purchase means a purchase, other than a cash purchase, of goods or services or an agreement to purchase goods or services
(a) by an individual other than for resale or for use in the course of his business, profession or calling, and
(b) from a person who is engaged in the business of selling or providing those goods or services;
goods means any article that is or may be the subject of trade or commerce, but does not include land or any interest therein;

purchaser means the individual by whom a consumer purchase is made;

seller means the person from whom a consumer purchase is made

Back to the Bills of Exchange Act, and our human signatures on commercial ‘instruments’ --

Bills of Exchange Act, 1985
Signature
4 Where, by this Act, any instrument or writing is required to be signed by any person, it is not necessary that he should sign it with his own hand, but it is sufficient if his signature is written thereon by some other person by or under his authority.
Bill of exchange
16 (1) A bill of exchange is an unconditional order in writing, addressed by one person to another, signed by the person giving it, requiring the person to whom it is addressed to pay, on demand or at a fixed or determinable future time, a sum certain in money to or to the order of a specified person or to bearer.
Non-compliance with requisites
(2) An instrument that does not comply with the requirements of subsection (1), or that orders any act to be done in addition to the payment of money, is not, except as hereinafter provided, a bill.
Accommodation bill
54 (1) An accommodation party to a bill is a person who has signed a bill as drawer, acceptor or endorser, without receiving value therefor, and for the purpose of lending his name to some other person.
Liability of party
(2) An accommodation party is liable on a bill to a holder for value, and it is immaterial whether, when that holder took the bill, he knew that party to be an accommodation party or not.

We asked Law Insider (AI) if the UCC-3 and the Bill of Exchange Act, protect the ‘accommodation party’ from liability by signing in the manner suggested in the video.

The Personal Property Security Act refers to each of the statutes passed by the common law provinces and territories of Canada. All Canadian provinces have adopted the Personal Property Security Act (PPSA) except for Quebec.
PPSA is for the most part, Canada’s equivalent to the UCC system, especially as regards to the UCC Article 9 (UCC-9). Each province has its own PPSA registry - Ontario has OnPPSA, Alberta has APPR (Alberta Personal Property Registry), BC has BCPPR, etc.
The basic concept of PPSA is the same as UCC Article (UCC-1) filings but the forms and requirements vary by province and the filing requirements get very tricky so that most people need a lawyer (of course).

According to Law Insider:

There isn’t a direct PPSA equivalent to UCC Article 3. UCC-3 governs negotiable instruments (notes, drafts, checks) as instruments of payment, including concepts like negotiability, holders in due course, presentment, dishonor, and enforcement of instruments.
The Canadian PPSAs primarily govern security interests in personal property and do not set the substantive rules for negotiability or enforcement of payment obligations. The Bills of Exchange Act, 1985 does that.
Substantive negotiable instruments law in Canada is covered in the federal Bills of Exchange Act, 1985 (BEA) covers most of what UCC Article 3 covers—e.g., what constitutes a bill, note, indorsement, holder in due course, presentment, dishonor, etc.)
Secured transactions treatment: Provincial PPSAs treat “instruments” (including negotiable instruments and certain payment intangibles) as a type of collateral and set perfection, priority, and enforcement rules for security interests in them. So, PPSA ≈ UCC Article 9 (not Article 3) for secured lending aspects.
Deposit accounts and payment systems: Some issues that sit under UCC Article 4 in the U.S. are handled in Canada by a mix of provincial legislation, common law, clearing rules (Payments Canada), and the BEA.
Summary:
For negotiability, transfer, party status and representation, and enforcement of notes/drafts/checks: look to the federal Bills of Exchange Act.
For taking, perfecting, and prioritizing a security interest in an “instrument”: look to your provincial PPSA (e.g., Ontario PPSA, BC PPSA).

So, we asked Law Insider (an AI):

Question: Is it correct that UCC-3 tends to protect the Accommodation Party from liability, but in contrast, the Canadian Bills of Exchange Act (BEA) does not protect the Accommodation Party from liability for the strawman/persons/legal entities created using their name?

The answer:

You’re asking whether UCC Article 3 protects an accommodation party from liability, while Canada’s Bills of Exchange Act (BEA) does not.
Clear answer:
Both regimes recognize accommodation parties and impose liability on them according to the instrument they sign. Neither system gives a blanket “no liability” protection to accommodation parties.
UCC Article 3 provides targeted defenses and discharge rules that can limit an accommodation party’s liability in certain circumstances. The BEA is more formal and less protective in those respects, but it does recognize suretyship-style defenses in limited ways.
Key points of comparison:
UCC Article 3 (U.S.)
Liability exists: An accommodation party is liable in the capacity in which they sign (maker, indorser, etc.).
Suretyship defenses: Article 3 expressly preserves surety defenses. If the creditor impairs collateral, extends time, or modifies the principal obligation without the accommodation party’s consent, the accommodation party may be discharged to the extent of the loss (see UCC 3-605).
Knowledge requirement: Holder’s knowledge of accommodation status can matter for some defenses.
Contribution/recourse: An accommodation party who pays has a right of recourse against the accommodated party.
Bills of Exchange Act (Canada)
Liability exists: An accommodation party (surety) who signs is liable to a holder for value, and the holder need not prove consideration beyond value given for the bill/note.
Fewer codified surety defenses: The BEA does not mirror UCC 3-605’s detailed discharge regime. Traditional suretyship defenses may be available under common law/equity, but they are not as expressly codified in the BEA context.
Holder in due course: The BEA’s HDC doctrine can cut off many defenses; accommodation status alone does not protect against an HDC.
Recourse: An accommodation party who pays can generally recover from the accommodated party (indemnity).
Practical takeaway
It is not correct to say UCC Article 3 “protects” accommodation parties from liability while the BEA does not. Both impose liability; UCC Article 3 more clearly articulates discharge protections when the creditor alters the risk without consent. Canadian law is less explicit in the statute, so you rely more on common law surety principles and careful drafting.
For Canadian deals, consider adding express suretyship protections in the instrument or ancillary agreement: consent requirements for extensions/modifications, waiver language, impairment-of-collateral rules, and clear indemnity in favor of the accommodation party.

We asked Law Insider to draft a short rider clause that preserves surety defenses for an Accommodation indorser under Canadian law. Following is what we got, but it is not short.

Here is Law Insiders answer:

Accommodation Indorser Rider (Canadian Law)
1. Status; Consideration. The undersigned (the Accommodation Indorser) signs this instrument solely as an accommodation party for the benefit of [ACCOMMODATED PARTY NAME], and not for the Accommodation Indorser’s own direct benefit. The holder acknowledges that the Accommodation Indorser’s liability, if any, is secondary and in the nature of suretyship.
2. Preservation of Suretyship Defenses. To the fullest extent permitted by applicable law (including the Bills of Exchange Act (Canada) and any applicable provincial law), the Accommodation Indorser retains all defenses, discharges, and rights available to a surety or guarantor (the Suretyship Defenses), including discharge or reduction of liability to the extent of any: (a) alteration or amendment of this instrument or the underlying obligation; (b) extension, renewal, indulgence, forbearance, waiver of defaults, or release; (c) release, substitution, loss, or impairment of any collateral or security; or (d) failure to give required notices—if any such action occurs without the prior written consent of the Accommodation Indorser.
3. No Enlargement of Risk Without Consent. The holder will not, without the Accommodation Indorser’s prior written consent, (a) increase the principal, interest rate, fees, or other material obligations; (b) extend the maturity or time for payment; (c) release or compromise claims against the maker/acceptor or any other party; or (d) release, subordinate, or impair collateral. Any action taken in breach of this Section 3 will discharge the Accommodation Indorser to the extent of the resulting prejudice.
4. Reservation of Rights Against Others. No delay, omission, or failure by the holder to exercise any right against the maker/acceptor or any other party will waive or prejudice the Accommodation Indorser’s Suretyship Defenses, and any indulgence granted to others will not enlarge the Accommodation Indorser’s obligations.
5. Reimbursement; Subrogation; Contribution. If the Accommodation Indorser pays any amount on this instrument: (a) the Accommodation Indorser is subrogated to the holder’s rights against the maker/acceptor and any collateral to the extent of such payment; (b) the maker/acceptor will promptly reimburse and indemnify the Accommodation Indorser for all amounts paid, plus reasonable costs and expenses (including legal fees on a substantial indemnity basis); and (c) the Accommodation Indorser retains all rights of contribution from any co‑accommodation parties.
6. Non‑Waiver; Written Waivers Only. The Accommodation Indorser does not waive any Suretyship Defenses except by an express written waiver that specifically references this Rider and is signed by the Accommodation Indorser. Any waiver by the holder of rights against others will not constitute a waiver of the Accommodation Indorser’s rights under this Rider.
7. Holder in Due Course; Notice. This Rider is intended to bind any holder who takes with actual knowledge (or notice apparent on the face of this instrument) that the undersigned is an accommodation indorser. The parties acknowledge that nothing in this Rider limits the rights of a holder in due course under the Bills of Exchange Act (Canada) who takes without such knowledge; provided that as between the original parties and any transferee with such knowledge, this Rider will be effective.
8. Governing Law; Conflicts. This Rider will be governed by and construed in accordance with the laws of the Province of [PROVINCE] and the federal laws of Canada applicable therein. To the extent of any conflict between this Rider and the body of the instrument, this Rider will prevail as between the signatories hereto.
9. Acknowledgement. The holder and the maker/acceptor acknowledge receipt of this Rider and agree that they will not take action inconsistent with its terms.
Notes for use:
Insert this as an attached rider to the note or bill, and have the holder and maker/acceptor acknowledge it.
Section 7 is calibrated to respect Bills of Exchange Act holder-in-due-course rules while preserving defenses against parties with knowledge.

SMART City DATA TRUSTS

Do you know about the SMART CITY DATA TRUSTS?

Corporations enabled by our corporate government have already stolen our private information and transferred it to all sorts of data collectors across the world…the tracking of you and your family is at crisis levels. The details of you and your family is sold on all sorts of data markets, making the elite who own these corporations billions of dollars annually.

That case Canadian Coalition for Firearm Rights v. Canada (Attorney General), 2025 FCA 82 (CanLII), specifically shows that the stage is set to take ALL private property, including your home, land, farm, animals, all private data …there is no limit.

Furthermore, this case makes it clear that there is no point in going to court, for the government and the courts owe the public no duty of procedural fairness! They are merely a corporation masquerading as ‘government’.

Before we get into the nitty-gritty of PIBs and SMART City Data Trusts, lets talk about the most dangerous thing happening to Canadians right now.

Canada is facing a privacy crisis explains the host of the program Bakes on Things -- 89% of Canadians are aware but have no recourse. Sadly, already the corrupt, communist Government of Canada knows more about you than your family does.

But most people don’t even realize how serious it’s become and most of the privacy data is collected even from children and from within your home and business.

From SMART phones and social media, to surveillance cameras, SMART devices such as FitBit, facial recognition, and AI, this Bakes on Things video shows how Canadians are now living in a world where their personal data is constantly collected, analyzed, stored and sold across the world.

As the video explains, by the time today’s graduates enter the workforce, employers, corporations, and governments already know more about them than ever before -- even more than their own parents do.

In the Bakes on Things episode titled ‘Tap the Maple’, he breaks it all down – when he is done you will realize that you have already experienced full loss of privacy, you just don’t know it. Most of that loss is what you contributed to in the name of ‘convenience’ – in other words, most of it is your own fault for not considering the consequences of using these ‘convenient’ data collecting devices.

Experts are warning that there may soon be nowhere left to hide from corporations and government intrusion and tyrannical control of our lives. By forcing us to provide corporations with pre-authorized debit payments in order to get service, we have also lost control of our bank accounts to strangers.

It’s all illegal, but they don’t care because they own you and your data and they make the rules.

The Tap the Maple episode was inspired by the excellent reporting of Valerie Fortney in the National Post. This isn’t just about technology. It’s about power, control, and the complete irreversible end of personal freedom in Canada.

If Canadians don’t start paying attention, the privacy we once took for granted may be gone for good. It’s pretty much gone now, but soon it will be forever.

We continue this important discussion in Part 16B.

Also, please let us know if any of our hyperlinks have stopped working so that we can fix them. Thank you.

People-United
people-united.ca

Subscribe now

Tip via Kofi/Stripe

E-transfer tips within Canada:
ADMIN-PU@proton.me

Series #2 PROPERTY THEFT Part 15 - Municipal Council Failures - No Recourse for Residents

People-United Uncensored — Sun, 28 Jun 2026 12:02:47 GMT

Many people wonder why it is that endless actions that border on criminal, ignorance of the law and failure to do their duty are all brushed under the carpet and go unpunished.

Lawyers have written legislation using weasel words that ensure public servants carrying out ‘policy’, such as municipal officials, usually can’t be sued. They get to hide behind the undefined ‘good faith’ provisions in legislation, engage in extreme lawlessness with impunity and the public is left with no recourse.

Even though the British Royals are long a thing of the past, and every province was declared a sovereign nation-state in 1931, Canada is operated like a monarchy, which is a softening word for ‘dictatorship’. Instead of the British dictatorship, we have the United Nations/World Economic/World Health Organization dictatorship.

Over the centuries we have been trained to believe that the Queen (now King) and their political entourage can do no wrong. If they do wrong, you are not to mention it in polite company, especially since nothing can be done about it anyway.

The Crown’s government foot soldiers have caused grievous harm time and again, yet no one can hold them personally accountable because lawyers ensured the “no private-law duty of care” principle would be invoked, in order to protect all public servants.

That principle, explained simply, means the government can make big, high-level decisions that can hurt or kill ordinary people, leaving the victims without recourse. Victims can sue, but the principle will be used in court to shield the perpetrators.

Moreover, when the use of that shield is combined with the fact that it is no longer a crime to lie to the public, and you have the reasons for the grievous harm and destruction of lives we have seen in the last 60 years at the hands of those dedicated to turning Canada communist by 2030.

In February 2019 (just months before the start of the COVID scam and lockdowns), the Trudeau government quietly repealed s. 181 of the Criminal Code of Canada that made lying to the public a crime punishable by up to 2 years in prison.

If you think back at when the outrageous and contradictory statements were lobbed at the people daily by the mainstream media and politicians during COVID, as well as by public health authorities, you will realize they felt safe to mislead us because they were told they were immune from prosecution and lawsuits. See here Section 181 of the Criminal Code of Canada RSC 1985, c C-46 in February 2019 just before it was repealed February 2019.

Now you know why municipal officials and their lawyers seem to LIE about everything and get away with it.

The decision to approve, promote at all levels of government and in every institution, and mandate the deadly mRNA injection was labelled a “core policy” made for the whole country. Moreover, it was presumed that the policy was made in ‘good faith’, a term that has never been defined.

Lawsuits were thus thrown out before any evidence of negligence, fraud, treason and crimes against humanity could even be heard. People were permanently and severely injured by the millions, many died, but still there was and is no recourse in this corporate dictatorship system.

Even police are shielded: on April 16, 2018, the Court of Appeal for Ontario released its decision in Connelly v. Toronto (Police Services Board), 2018 ONCA 368 (CanLII) affirming that police do not owe a private law duty of care to victims of crime and their families in relation to the investigation of alleged crimes. Learn more about why police have no duty and the public is living under the illusion that they do, here.

And in a case about Health Care of Canada negligence in 2012 we had this decision: Taylor v. Canada (Attorney General), in which the Court of Appeal for Ontario addressed the requirements for a plaintiff to establish sufficient proximity between the plaintiff and the defendant in a claim brought against a governmental body for regulatory negligence.

The matter came before the court as a “special case” arising from an apparent inconsistency in the court’s prior decisions in Drady v. Canada (Health), leave to appeal to S.C.C. refused, [2008] S.C.C.A. No. 492, and Attis v. Canada (Health), leave to appeal to S.C.C. refused, [2008] S.C.C.A. No. 491, on the one hand, and Sauer v. Canada (Attorney General), leave to appeal to S.C.C. refused, [2007] S.C.C.A. No. 454, on the other.

In other words, corporate governments and their employees never take responsibility for harm they cause and are never held accountable.

Corporations protect one another

During the COVID holocaust, the corporate government had also secretly signed contracts giving the vaccine, drug and mRNA manufacturers and promoters of the deadly mRNA injections that they misrepresented as ‘safe and effective’ vaccine, immunity from lawsuits.

Policy makers, vaccine manufacturers, the lying government bureaucrats and politicians all lied yet harmed families could not sue Pfizer or Moderna or hold their decision-makers personally accountable. Yes, a no-fault compensation program was to be offered, but that too ended up being a boondoggle, with millions of taxpayer dollars going to incompetents and devastated families left without financial support.

Decision-makers always realize three things:

(a) there would be real human costs,

(b) the public could be fear-mongered into going along with policies that would harm them, and

(c) they could not be held personally accountable in a courtroom because the law says “the system has no duty to the public”.

An Unsatisfactory Legal System Combined With an Absence of Morality & Integrity is the Canadian Circumstance

The legal principle discussed above purportedly originated as a good tool. It was presumed that tough decisions would be made by those with exemplary morals and integrity so was deemed important not to let lawsuits interfere with the decisions made by governments and bureaucrats.

As we have increasingly experienced, the system has not worked because the main ingredients -- moral courage and integrity – are non-existent.

The other problem for Canadians is that if we choose not to fall for the ‘safe and effective’, ‘in the public interest’ marketing, and if we ask questions, we will get more lies, more gaslighting and experience more force until we comply.

No one voted for giving our governments the authority to establish an acceptable level of ‘collateral damage’ to Canadians in return for progress.

Nor did we give them the right to create horrific levels of pain and suffering to advance their personal and corporate profiteering purposes while hiding behind their conveniently installed legal shields.

Until we end corporate government structures -- and discard the legal shields including the presumption of ‘acting in good faith’ that allows the evil and or incompetents to recklessly make policies that advance their personal agendas with impunity and without accountability -- the suffering of Canadians will not only continue but worsen.

If they claim ‘incompetence’ then punishment for choosing to continue in their positions while incompetent should make it clear that incompetents do not get to continue causing harm without consequence.

The Consequences of Making Governments Untouchable in Real Time

Ontario Municipal councils and officials, with the coverup provided by City lawyers, are wilfully ignoring the law, enabling theft and the taking of constructive possession of all property!

They do it all knowing they can hide behind the shields discussed above that makes them immune to efforts to hold them accountable.

Are you paying attention to what your municipal councils are doing, because their wilful ignorance of their duties to ensure the corporation staff is not acting criminally against private property owners is eventually going to affect your property?

By 2026, secret council meetings are all the rage. Here is one story from Cornwall, Ontario where all provincial requirements for notice of meetings and the only reasons why council meetings can be ‘secret’ have been violated. The toothless Ombudsman held that all rules and regulations governing council meetings were violated…so Cornwall council had more secret meetings, showing everyone who is boss in our UN-controlled world.

This secrecy is happening right across Canada, much the same way that it happened in BC where land title schemes were being set up with the Aboriginal industry.

Elected municipal councils are being used by the corporations running the municipalities to do the bidding of UN-controlled planners to remove all property rights and deprive private property owners of their properties.

**IT IS ESSENTIAL THAT ALL PROPERTY OWNERS understand the law that limits municipal councillors in their duties to public assets, not private property. See our MUNICIPAL FRAUD series starting here for details.

**IT IS ESSENTIAL THAT ALL PROPERTY OWNERS understand how municipal corporation staff violate the law by keeping municipal councillors ignorant of their authority, and by violating all laws municipalities are bound by.

Municipal corporations are for-profit corporations hording billions in surplus while extorting private property owners under the color of law. You can see the set of books filed by municipalities that are not public, here.

‘Color of law’ means pretending that laws exist or apply that do not, knowing the public is unlikely to untangle the messes.

Provincial and federal governments cannot create regulations to remove property ownership from the people! They can only trick us to accept them.

Municipal council members are indoctrinated by municipal corporation Chief Administrative Officers (CAO’s) and senior staff that have often been there for decades. They are instructed to

(a) listen only to the corporate managers,

(b) not read the law or learn their responsibilities,

Councillors believe they are to trust the UN-controlled planners and CAOs to do what’s best for the municipal corporation.

Many municipal councillors are led to believe it is NOT their job to read the Municipal Act or the Planning Act or any other legislative act.

Municipal corporations ignore the superior legislation, in this case the Planning Act, across Ontario. They are working with developers that have targeted property for development and will prevent the rightful owner of all opportunity to develop their existing properties. Municipal planners will fabricate non-existent ‘parking’ by-laws, impose renovation by-laws far in excess of the limits placed by the Building Code and keep property owners in litigation for decades.

The Building Code restricts interference with private property to ONLY those times when there is an identifiable, legitimate, unacceptable risk of harm, and in 2010, an Ottawa court case reenforced that fact – no unacceptable safety concern, no authority of the municipality’s building inspector or planners to interfere. Still private property owners are attacked for every improvement they make on their properties.

In the important Ottawa case of R. v. Lemieux, 2009 ONCJ 676 (CanLII), which was not appealed by the City of Ottawa and therefore stands as law, the Judge stated:

“The primary aim of the Building Code as enunciated by the City is referenced to the Ontario Legislature’s “A Guide to the Use of the Code” which notes that “the Code is essentially a set of minimum provisions respecting the safety of buildings to public health, fire protection, accessibility and structural sufficiency.” One must accept that the legislation is specifically written this way for clarity in assessing intent.
10. Note is also made of the case of Gratton-Musay Environmental Technologies v. Building Materials Evaluation Commission (2002) stating that the purpose of the Act is to protect the health and safety of the public. Health and safety are recurring themes in the Code and highlight the intent of the legislation.
[ … ]
There is no evidence that any of the noted violations meet the definition of significant changes or alterations, no change brought forward in evidence is structural in nature and there is no evidence of any public safety issues or hazards to continued occupancy.
Homeowners routinely renovate their homes below the ‘significant’ change level which would require permits and continue to live in the premises quite safely. There is no evidence of any concern about plumbing or the sewers or any structural changes of note including the removal of a basement wall separating the two addresses. The fact that a beam and post were discovered outside the premises amongst other material is not in itself conclusive evidence that the owner dangerously removed a supporting wall or made structural or substantial changes. Material and debris was removed from the property without any collaborating evidence that anything significant affecting structural integrity or public health and safety was jeopardized. The only evidence is that the wall was a type of privacy and sound proofing screen and not a load bearing separation.
75. Consequently, there is no proof that permits were required, no evidence of hazard, and no requirement shown to vacate the premises. The charges relating to 330 St. Patrick Street are now dismissed.
76. … The intent of the legislation is to protect the public health and safety while ensuring that significant projects meet minimum associated standards.
80. Taking all of that into account, I find there is no basis for the charges relating to the properties at 328 and 330 St. Patrick Street and they are now dismissed.
81. All of the charges before the court are dismissed.

Yet, most municipalities have contradicted the Building Code, deliberately expanded the intentions of the act to protect the PUBLIC from safety and health hazards to one where any work on a building requires a building permit and endless inspections and interference with the work. The reason for the lawlessness is strictly because most Judges are compromised and corrupt.

EVERY property owner should read, study and make a copy of that case because the entire 8 charges brought against the owner were dismissed for lack of any evidence of PUBLIC safety or health issues. That is the way that courts are to work … justly, with common sense and an intention to protect human and property rights.

The amendments to the Ontario Planning Act in 2022 are similarly clear, but totally ignored by corrupt Judges facilitating municipal abuse of the population:

Planning Act, 1990 (amendments effective 2022)
Restrictions for residential units
35.1 (1) The authority to pass a by-law under section 34 does not include the authority to pass a by-law that prohibits the use of,
(a) two residential units in a detached house, semi-detached house or rowhouse on a parcel of urban residential land, if all buildings and structures ancillary to the detached house, semi-detached house or rowhouse cumulatively contain no more than one residential unit;
(b) three residential units in a detached house, semi-detached house or rowhouse on a parcel of urban residential land, if no building or structure ancillary to the detached house, semi-detached house or rowhouse contains any residential units; or
(c) one residential unit in a building or structure ancillary to a detached house, semi-detached house or rowhouse on a parcel of urban residential land, if the detached house, semi-detached house or rowhouse contains no more than two residential units and no other building or structure ancillary to the detached house, semi-detached house or rowhouse contains any residential units. 2022, c. 21, Sched. 9, s. 9.
Same, parking
(1.1) The authority to pass a by-law under section 34 does not include the authority to pass a by-law requiring more than one parking space to be provided and maintained in connection with a residential unit referred to in subsection (1) other than the primary residential unit. 2022, c. 21, Sched. 9, s. 9; 2023, c. 10, Sched. 6, s. 7.
Same, minimum area
(1.2) The authority to pass a by-law under section 34 does not include the authority to pass a by-law that regulates the minimum floor area of a residential unit referred to in subsection (1) of this section. 2022, c. 21, Sched. 9, s. 9.

Municipal Councillors Guide -- ignored

The Province of Ontario distributes a document called the Municipal Councillors Guide to ensure municipal councillors WILL KNOW and UNDERSTAND what their roles are, what the law says, and WHERE their authority lies WHEN they exercise their powers, if they have any authority at all over a specific matter such as private property, which they do not.

Councillors are not hard to discourage from learning their roles and knowing the limits of their authority and power. This gross failure and dereliction of duty allows corporate staff to coerce, brow-beat and otherwise manipulate them into approving unlawful bylaws against private property owners and then use these unlawful bylaws as a means to fine or collect “fees” as additional revenue for the for-profit municipal corporation.

Municipal Councils, due to wilful ignorance of their duties, unknowingly give away their power to the CAO’s through their “Delegations of Authority”. CAO’s, treasurers, property standards officers and building inspectors then go on to use force and the threat of force, lawfare and charges against the tax roll of targeted property owners, without ever having authority and power to do so.

Whether a private property owner is aware of the limitations a municipal government has in regulating private property through their bylaws or not, CAOs, Treasurers, particularly Planners and senior staff, will assure ignorant councillors that they do have such powers, and will use taxpayer monies to weaponize lawyers against property owners who refuse the constructive take-over of their property.

In the MUNICIPAL FRAUD Series, you learn just what laws municipal councillors are responsible not to violate, and that includes misrepresenting laws and allowing the service corporation to violate property rights.

In most municipalities, the CAO’s have the council members’ email communication set up so that it can be screened by the corporate staff who determine what councillors ultimately receive or send out. By 2026, municipalities have paid international companies for the use of govstack.com, a software designed to end live interaction with public servants and to provide NO REPLY email form responses to enquires, as well as to keep track of who is requesting by-laws and other information. See details in PROPERTY THEFT, Part 7C.

CAOs (Chief Administrative Officer) and senior staff create “policies” and “procedures” for council members to follow, which are not remotely LAW. Meanwhile the LAW (Municipal Act and Planning Act) is bypassed and hidden deep in the bowels of the corporation’s “policies and procedures” vault.

Think of the for-profit municipal corporation CAO’S and senior staff as ‘guards’ or ‘gatekeepers’ for the councillors, tasked with keeping elected officials separated from the people who elected them.

CAOs therefore, by keeping municipal councillors ignorant of the facts and their duties to protect their electorate, use brute force and tax payer monies to destroy property, investments and families.

Similarly with municipal Treasurers who collect property taxes on farms and primary residences, when the Municipal Act specifically states they have no authority or power to tax. See our TAXATION FRAUD series for details as well as our MUNICIPAL FRAUD Part 3.

Municipalities are “service” corporations that were created by the province to provide “services” to the people who reside within that municipal geographical boundary and to do so ‘at-cost’.

Unlike Municipal corporations that are regulated under the authority of the Municipal Act of Ontario, business corporations are regulated under the Corporations Act of Ontario and of Canada regarding how they must operate.

The main difference is that instead of a Board of Directors being appointed to protect the interests of the shareholders of a business corporation, municipal corporations have “elected” municipal councillors (elected by the people) who are purportedly in those roles to protect the interests of their residents and property owners.

In their roles, municipal councillors are to ensure the municipal service corporation is held accountable and operates according to law at all times – but they don’t.

Councillors would only know the parameters of their authority if they had read and become proficient in the Municipal Councillors Guide (archived here)-- Section 7 – Councillors as Lawmakers.

They don’t read the law and the Municipal Councillors Guide and don’t care if we know that.

Municipal Act, 2001

Section 11
Bylaws: A lower and upper tier municipality may pass bylaws subject to the rules in subsection (4) respecting the following matters:
1. Governance structure of the municipality and its local boards.
2. Accountability and transparency of the municipality and its operations and of its local boards and their operations.
3. Financial management of the municipality and its local boards.
4. Public assets of the municipality acquired for the purpose of exercising its authority under this or any other Act.
5. Economic, social and environmental well-being of the municipality, including respecting climate change. (See O. Reg. 599/06) 6. Health, safety and well-being of persons.
7. Services and things that the municipality is authorized to provide under subsection (1).
8. Protection of persons and property, including consumer protection.

*** The only reason that such by-laws can be passed or not passed, is if the subject matter of the by-law pertains to the provision of services to the public, since that is the ‘service’ corporations only task.

Note: There is not a single reference to activity on PRIVATE PROPERTY.

The ONLY reference to “private property” is where the municipality has “acquired” private property; and once they acquire it, it then becomes a “public asset” belonging to the municipality.

Logically, as stated in point (4) above, ‘public assets’ must be lawfully acquired before the municipal councillors can exercise their authority over the asset.

Municipalities can lawfully ‘acquire’ private property through

(a) purchase,

(b) lease agreement registered on the property’s Title,

(d) if a private property owner dedicated his land or a portion of it to the municipality.

What ignorant and reckless elected municipal councillors have done, instead, is to delegate their duties and their authority and powers to the corporations providing the service, who in turn use unlawful means to deprive private property owners of the use of their property, drive them into bankruptcy by weaponizing contracted legal firms to target and then emotionally and financially exhaust the property owner.

Municipal councillors are routinely approving expenditures for litigation against innocent private property owners, when that litigation is without justification and is unlawful. There is no recourse in Ontario…all the courts are so corrupt that municipal lawyers directed by corporate staff lie, misrepresent the law and the facts and help the municipal officials continue the abuse of the property owner long after litigation has started.

There is no law or act that gives any municipality the authority and power to create bylaws to regulate private property without the consent of the property owner.

However, the criminal cartels running rough-shod over every municipality at the behest of the United Nations won’t even let councillors discuss plans rationally or at all with residents.

Municipal corporations have been depriving private property owners of the use of their properties to gain income on a regular basis. They will keep a property owner in court for years and harness property standards officers to harass and intimidate targeted private property owners relentlessly.

The Chief Administrative Officers (CAOs) and Planners are aware of all this. But they operate under a different set of directives and laws: the United Nations Municipal Primer, 1994, that requires them to promote the globalist agenda and not the domestic agenda. In other words, they are traitors working for the World Government.

Since municipalities are bound to work under the authority of the Planning Act, (as well as the Municipal Act) councillors need to look at the definitions in the Planning Act.

Planning Act
Section 2
--defines what “matters of provincial interest are” and this definition is consistent with the Provincial Policy Statement.

Again, PRIVATE PROPERTY IS NOT LISTED AS “MATTERS OF PROVINCIAL INTEREST” IN THE DEFINITION OF ‘PROVINCIAL MATTERS’ IN THE PLANNING ACT.

It is therefore very clear, that the municipal councillors and the corporate services departments of the municipalities in Ontario are engaged in unlawful acts, including crimes against private property owners.

Clearly, the Planning Act directs municipal planning on LANDS belonging to the province or the municipality. There is nothing that refers to private property.

Planning Act
Section 14.7
“If LAND in a municipal planning area is covered by an Official Plan, the parts of the official plan that affect land in the municipal planning area, will be the Official Plan under the municipal planning authority.”

Municipal planning areas are lands already owned or acquired by the Province or Municipality such as Crown, provincial and municipal lands, including parks, lands in the Greenbelt Plan, Niagara Escarpment Plan, Oak Ridges Moraine Conservation Plan.

Section 16 of the Planning Act of Ontario states that an official plan shall have goals, objectives and policies established “to manage and direct physical change and the effects on the social, economic, built and natural environment of the municipality”.

Planning Act
Section 16
“Manage” means WHERE the municipality has been granted the authority to control and manage, which are public assets belonging to the municipality such as garbage dumps, parks and recreation, etc.

Municipalities have never been given authority or power to manage and control private property, as we saw above.

Planning Act
Section 58
Acquisition of Land
“The Municipal Act 2001 or the City of Toronto Act 2006, as the case may be, applies to the acquisition of land under this Act.”

The “Acquisition of Land”: means to refer to the Municipal Act, section 11, subsection (2), Part 4, that states, “AFTER the municipality has acquired such land, it then becomes a municipal public asset” that now gives them the right to exercise their authority and to “plan” for it.

Private property IS NOT a “public asset”.

Again, the law is clear, private property is not a public asset and jurisdiction to regulate it does not exist. For-profit municipal corporations have used lawyers to hide this truth, to use legal and brute force to take over private lands, and to run a municipality as though ALL lands are public and ‘owned’ by the municipality’s corporate cabal.

As we explain throughout this Series, Municipalities openly violate the law because they operate by a set of fictitious UN dictates as though they were real laws. Those fictitious UN laws are upheld by corrupt Judges and lawyers as though they are legitimate laws because they long ago went to work for the globalists.

The Legislation provided above and in our MUNICIPAL FRAUD series proves that municipalities DO NOT HAVE THE AUTHORITY to enforce bylaws or regulation on private property, unless they have acquired that property with the consent of the property owner in order to make it a “public asset”.

The Supreme Court of Canada (SCC) dealt two blows to over-stepping municipalities with respect to private property rights.

In two cases before the SCC, one in 2022 and the other in 2023, the municipality LOST because they overstepped their authority by interfering with the property owners’ ability to develop their properties and attempted to regulate property that does not belong to them:

Annapolis Group Inc. v. Halifax Regional Municipality, 2022 SCC 36 (CanLII) (archived here)

City of St. John’s v. Wallace Lynch, et al., 2023 CanLII 19752 (SCC)
(archived here)

Both of these cases were in Eastern Canada. In Ontario, ALL legislation, case decisions and provincial policy directions and even legal non-conforming laws have been ignored by corrupt courts.

Corrupt lawyers work to protect corporate planning staff as they take constructive possession of private property and deprive private property owners, one after another, of their properties through unlawful by-laws and damaging zoning changes. They have repeatedly ignored 100 years of legal-non-conforming property rights law and case decision and but for their protective shields of ‘no duty of care to the public’ and ‘acting in good faith’, they could be prosecuted for their crimes and imprisoned.

In Part 16, we will continue to highlight the root causes of our slide into economic devastation at the hands of those getting big fat pensions for doing us wrong.

Also, please let us know if any of our hyperlinks have stopped working so that we can fix them. Thank you.

People-United
people-united.ca

Subscribe now

Tip via Kofi/Stripe

E-transfer tips within Canada:
ADMIN-PU@proton.me

Series #2 PROPERTY THEFT Part 14D -Consequences of Having No Absolute Title in our UN-controlled Land

People-United Uncensored — Thu, 25 Jun 2026 12:02:14 GMT

In Part 14C we explained Legislative Trick #3 about how the various manipulations and amendments of superior laws perfectly positioned us to be ruled by the United Nations as ‘tenants’ on our own lands, much the way ‘lords’ ran their feudal holders in the middle ages.

Below is a summary of the UN goals for the world, and especially in Canada where it has a stranglehold over most land and Canadians.

Even when all the procedures are followed to restore one’s exclusive control of the property they paid for, the corporations behind this theft ignore the law altogether, write rules and laws to suit themselves and then count on the Courts to backstop any effort to overcome the carnage caused millions of people. For more info on court corruption, check out our LEGAL FRAUD series.

What has happened is summarized as ‘regulatory capture’. Regulatory agencies are created to protect consumers, but evidence suggests all regulatory bodies fall prey to regulatory capture.

Regulatory capture occurs when regulatory bodies protect and advance the agenda of the industry it was formed to regulate. These regulatory bodies become known as ‘captured agencies’. Hasn’t the provincial government become a captured regulatory body?

Municipalities try to hide their schemes, including by denying the law that is in black and white under the Municipal Act, simply because they can use the Municipal Police to do their bidding (they also pay the police).

Municipal corporations falsely claim their regulations and by-laws are for:

Public good
Protection of the public (inhabitants)

If you check out our upcoming CONSTITUTION-CHARTER FRAUD series, you will see why the Charter is a useless piece of propaganda and the Court of Appeal was giving the Charter importance it could not have unless the government wanted the change.

R. v. Hynes 1999 CanLII 18979 (NL CA)
83) Prior to the charter’s advent the individual really had no special means of protecting against incursions upon his or her basic fundamental rights by Executive or Legislature arms of the State.
84) Primary purpose of the Charter was to change this relationship…

Because it is so important for everyone to understand the scheme that has duped you for so long, taking all that you have worked so hard to build up throughout your life, we will repeat the reality. Try to memorize the facts, so that when you are presented with the non-violent solution to reverse these assaults on humanity in the future, you will know why they are proposed as they are.

Until then…

THE Corporate MUNICIPALITY IS OPERATING YOUR FUNDAMENTAL RIGHT TO OWN PROPERTY ALONE – through the ‘agency’ fraud, it INSTALLS ITSELF AS ABSOLUTE OWNER TO BE FREE OF CHARGES AND TAXATION AS A HUMAN BEING:

Operates as your agent (assumes Human Being rights)

Names themselves as 1st registered owners (holders)
Invokes rights of Human Beings under Article 45 – for themselves! The MUNICIPALITY HAS ABSOLUTE OWNER RIGHTS BUT REFUSES TO INVOKE s.45 as your agent which would free you of obligations to obey and pay
Give you Qualified Title – qualified to use the property so long as you obey and pay
YOU pay taxes because you are only QUALIFIED OWNER
IF YOU WERE ABSOLUTE OWNER, YOU COULD INSTEAD INVOKE s. 45 LTA, JUST AS MUNICPALITY DID and be free of all taxes, levies, by-laws, municipal trespasses, as all humans were intended to live.
WHEN MUNICIPALITY OPERATES AS ABSOLUTE OWNER AND 1ST REG’D OWNER, THEY CAN THEN PRODUCE AND ATTACH ANNEXED DOCUMENTS
ANNEXED DOCUMENTS - THEIR RESTRICTIONS UPON YOUR LAND – TAKE AWAY RIGHTS
YOUR RIGHTS UNDER section 45 of the Land Titles Act TO BE FREE OF ENACTMENTS ARE REMOVED BECAUSE YOU ARE ONLY QUALIFIED OWNER. Further, the TERANET system only provides the most recent transaction on your Parcel Register and only lawyers can get into the TeraVIEW database.
Result: if YOU don’t pay your taxes and meet their qualifications to remain on the property they remove you and take your property.
NONE OF THIS COULD HAPPEN IF YOU WERE ABSOLUTE OWNER WITH FULLY INVOKED s. 45 to remove obligation to de facto legislative authority (taxes)

As you can see, this is one of the many ways that you have been wrongly deprived of your land, your wealth and resources, and you should be entitled to remedy in a court of competent jurisdiction because the superior laws and even the Land Title Act states so:

Remedy of person wrongfully deprived of land
57 (1) A person wrongfully deprived of land or of some estate or interest therein, by reason of the land being brought under this Act or by reason of some other person being registered as owner through fraud or by reason of any misdescription, omission or other error in a certificate of ownership or charge, or in an entry on the register, is entitled to recover what is just, by way of compensation or damages, from the person on whose application the erroneous registration was made or who acquired the title through the fraud or error.
Proof of compliance with other statutes
76 In respect of the first registration of land or any subsequent registration of an instrument under this Act, the land registrar may require such proof as he or she considers sufficient, or as is specified by the Director of Titles, of compliance with any Act of Canada or Ontario that if not complied with would affect the title of the first registered owner or the title or interest of the person taking under the subsequent instrument.

As you can see from reading the outcome before the Divisional Court of an appeal of the Director of Land Title’s refusal to ‘right’ a fraudulent situation, here, it doesn’t matter what the law says because the corporations disguised as service providers ignore domestic law and make their own laws as they go. They operate under the ‘colour of law’.

Dictionary definition of ‘Colour of Law’:

By incorporating every individual property owner into the municipal corporation, by turning the individual man and woman into corporate ‘classes’ of assets, the corporation becomes in effect an ‘owner’. Property owners, without realizing the scam, become common tenants and tenants in common when they are in fact the rightful owner and it has all been done by officials who appear to have, but don’t have legitimate authority.

It’s all fraud because you didn’t agree to this arrangement. Fraud vitiates everything and that is why these corporations will use deception, all sorts of illegal tactics and force to the point of violence to keep property owners in their place as ‘tenants’.

Trick #4 ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNALS

The problem with all tribunals is always the same. The parties are deprived of access to real courts and subjected instead to the opinions, beliefs, and whims of unelected political appointees of the United Nations. Usually these ‘appointees’ are lawyers who are morally and ethically bankrupt, self-serving socialist/communists.

As you will learn shortly, tribunals circumvent the law by giving ‘lawyers’ a perch from which to wield their opinions and to make new laws that usually undermine fundamental human rights to advance the government’s social justice narrative.

Not even the Human Rights Tribunals are seen as useful or beneficial in Canada, except to fat-cat lawyers who get appointed to these tribunals, and the lawyers that defend/prosecute the applications to tribunals.

As the government quietly moved from a proper court system to the United Nation’s ‘Administrative Law’ system, the people lost their rights to fair trials and been subjected to unnecessary stress and financial expense.

This is seen across ALL tribunals, and it is no wonder the public is demanding an end to tribunals such as the Human Rights Tribunals, Worker’s Compensation Tribunals, Land Tribunals and Landlord Tenant Tribunals that tend to make decisions that are not remotely ‘right’ but instead in alignment with what the politicians of the day are pushing.

Children are the property of their parents, yet extremely dangerous Human Right Tribunals violate this property right and decide our fundamental rights from their pulpits, kept warm by a succession of UN-appointed lawyers and shills.

“Schools across Canada are capitulating to the radical sex activist’s agenda in a spirit of so-called diversity and inclusion and in a twisted compliance to the amended Human Rights Code. The Catholic Schools are no exception unfortunately, and even leading the charge at times. Never mind that they are in violation of the Word of God and morality, but in the name of social justice and identity politics, they’re all in. What are the consequences? The breakdown of societal norms and the cornerstone of a thriving society, the natural family. This is a top down problem with the Pope spearheading the agenda.
Something to consider: When the federal government amended the Canadian Human Rights Act to include gender identity and expression as a protected class, it did not eliminate or override the existing protected sections of the Act such as religion and family status. The addition of “gender identity or expression” is not a green light for the radical LGBTQ sex activists to run roughshod over everyone else’s rights and therefore, it is critical to take a stand to defend the true victims of this assault, the natural family, women and children.”
~ Action4Canada, March 6, 2023

This move to administrative tribunals was accomplished by using the UN’s public-private partnership (PPP or P3) scheme that turns government (public) services and assets into private for-profit enterprises, with their own ‘court’ system and rules. We discuss in detail starting with this series, how our nation was literally lost to PPPs that turned public institutions into private for-profit businesses practically overnight (eg TERANET).

The province installed the extremely corrupt for-profit corporate Worker Compensation Board/Worker Safety Insurance Board (WCB/WSIB) to remove all worker rights to a real court. It was promoted as being a more convenient, faster and fairer way to deal with issues between the worker and their employer. What this administrative tribunal does in effect, is incubate corruption, criminality, medical fraud and deprive even extremely injured workers benefits until they lose their homes.

Employers are all for this system because it prevents workers from ever being able to sue them for negligence, misconduct and other actions that caused the accident or illness and their premiums do not rise as they should when there is a claim.

Workers are never given the choice of suing their employer in a proper court, so employers end up never being held truly responsible for negligence in the workplace. Please see WORKER COMPENSATION RACKETS series for details that will surely upset any working Canadian.

Even if an injured worker can appeal a tribunal decision, the courts never disturb the decisions of such tribunals as they are seen as ‘experts’ on the subject adjudicated. Of course, the worker’s lawyer drains them of any money they might have had saved for a ‘rainy day’.

Municipal Property Assessment Corporation (MPAC) decisions are appealed to the highly criticized tribunal called the Assessment Review Board that gets its authority from the Assessment Act.

The creation and operation of MPAC involved another fraud against Ontarians – in other provinces these corporations are called by different names. This Ontario MPAC organization was set-up, like TERANET Ltd, out of the blue, in great secrecy.

Please see our PROPERTY ASSESSMENT FRAUD series to understand this massive swindle and unlawful profiteering scam against property owners, all of which is designed to eventually physically and financially force you off your property through impossible and illegal taxation.

On December 31, 1998, the Government of Ontario transferred responsibility for property assessment from the Ministry of Finance to the Ontario Property Assessment Corporation (OPAC), a purportedly independent body established by the Ontario Property Assessment Corporation Act, 1997.

They didn’t even bother with the interim step of a private-public partnership, as they did with TERANET -- MPAC is not a Crown agency and is an entirely unaccountable for-profit corporation spun off the Land Management system criminal corporation ‘TERANET’.

In 2001 amendments to the Ontario Property Assessment Corporation Act, 1997, changed the composition of the Board of Directors and renamed the organization to the Municipal Property Assessment Corporation (MPAC).

Every municipality in Ontario is a member of MPAC, a non-share capital, purportedly not-for-profit corporation (right!) whose main responsibility is to provide its customers - property owners, tenants, municipalities, and government and business stakeholders – with consistent and accurate property assessments BASED ON MARKET VALUE instead of the actual cost to the municipality of providing the services.

***** Property value assessments based on a corrupted TERANET database is hardly fair and accurate assessing, BUT MORE IMPORTANTLY the value of one’s property has nothing whatever to do with the cost to the municipality of providing the services it is mandated to provide.

Please read that again! The value of one’s property has nothing whatever to do with the cost to the municipality of providing the services it is mandated to provide! Whether you have 2 bedrooms or 4, you should be paying for the services provided to the building and not the buildings market value if sold.

The scheme of basing property taxes on the market value or other value of the property was the start of taxing property owners out of their investments by artificially raising property values every few years. It was a scheme of the United Nations installed across Canada starting in 1990, but moved into warp speed by 2000.

Presently MPAC enforces the Assessment Act, RSO 1990, c A.31 (archived here) and since 2003 (when the provincial government transferred full private control of the land registration system to TERANET), there have been 33 amendments, each legislating more and more incursions onto private property, abuse of property owners and taxation fraud.

Here is one example of warrantless searches being legalized:

Assessment Act, RSO 1990:

Landlord Tenancy Board and Residential Tenancy Act

As a direct result of government and tribunal interferences, property owners cannot choose freely those tenants they wish to rent to. Nor can they get rid of bad tenants for many months on end, in some cases 2 years or more, while many continue to do damage or refuse to pay their rent and utilities.

The Residential Tenancies Act, 2006, SO 2006, c 17 (RTA) (archived here) renders the true owner of the property merely a building manager on their own property.

Note: the RTA does NOT apply to residential rental companies, ONLY to small landlords. Institutional housing is never impacted by by-laws and such impositions on private lives.

Landlords and tenants HAVE NO CHOICE in whether to access actual courts to resolve their contract issues, or to chance the tribunal. The Landlord Tenant Board (Tribunal) is the only game in town and most times they are MIA.

The alleged purpose of the Landlord Tenant Board of Ontario (LTB Ontario) is to have subject-matter experts resolve landlord tenant issues, even though most members hearing the issues have never been a landlord.

The real purpose, however, is to systematically end property owner access to the courts and giving the province and the tenant constructive possession of the property by proxy – the tenants.

Contract law is totally ignored -- unless the contract is written the way the LTB feels it should be written, which is not helpful whatsoever, with many loopholes, it is totally ignored. In addition, the RTA prohibits a landlord from contracting in ‘no dogs’, ‘no smoking’, ‘no additional tenants’ and other provisions important to protect his/her property.

Here are examples of illegal incursions on, and interference with, the use of private property, in direct violation of the UDHR and ICCPR, as a result of the Residential Tenancy Act of Ontario:

In effect, the LTB, as with the Worker Compensation Boards and Municipal Boards, are nothing but unmitigated disasters: landlords, as well as good tenants with bad landlords, are stuck with the incompetence of the usually inaccessible LTB.

The SOLE reason that there is a housing crisis is because the UN-controlled Landlord and Tenancy Board of Ontario has so thoroughly taken constructive possession of a property that even a solid and otherwise binding contract between the landlord and tenant is interfered with. Small landlords have thus seen fit by the tens of thousands to pull their basement and other apartments from the marketplace.

Thousands of landlords have shouldered the burden of thousands of dollars in tenant damages to property because they cannot simply evict a bad tenant. Now, many property owners are not interested in renting out or converting a spare space in their homes to an apartment.

While a property owner can defend himself and his property from damage, they have no such rights if they rent a unit on the property to the perpetrator. They must stand by and watch the damage being done, while spending thousands of dollars to navigate the many forms and hearings before the Landlord and Tenant Board. Usually, the Board will find in favor of the tenant, allow them to continue to not pay rent and/or to do damage for several more months before a Sheriff can be called upon to evict the tenants.

The Landlord Tenant Board process takes at least 8 months just to get a hearing date. See a notice to an Ottawa Landlord here. Please note that the notice was in response to the landlord advising the LTB that its phone was not working and that Canada Post was unable to deliver the package that contained the landlord’s Application materials.

Often, Sheriffs take 2-3 months to get to the eviction and even after they removed the evicted tenants, the tenants can still enter to get their possessions and of course do more damage.

Just a short decade ago, there were 660,000 single family dwellings with an additional suite. We did not see the landlord/tenant issue we see today and the issues caused directly by the Board that emboldens tenants to not pay rent or do damage and live free for months as the landlord grinds his/her way through the process have caused thousands of small landlords to exit the rental market entirely and permanently.

The Landlord Tenant Board of Ontario has made it impossible for landlords to evict bad tenants, even when they fail to pay their utilities bills and rent for months on end. The interference of the government in what should be contracts between a landlord and tenant serve as a disincentive for the homeowner thinking of creating a rental unit, and the small entrepreneurial landlord ready to invest in a rental property.

In this recent article (archived here) Canada Free Press describes the epidemic of squatters taking over private property, and often police refuse to help homeowners. Many tenants in Ontario are now ‘squatting’ for free on private property.

It takes many months to go through the eviction process, and more often years. In the meantime, the landlord can be put through sheer terror. When you cannot evict a bad tenant before they do damage or cost almost $12,000 in costs, you know that the property is not your own.

As of January 1, 2023, the only phone number for the LTB of Ontario has a fast busy signal day and night, as though the line needs repair. At least at the Ottawa-East Region Office of the LTB located on Albert Street, Ottawa, they are not open to accept Applications for a Hearing by registered mail. To deliver by hand, you must call the number that doesn’t work and make an appointment that could be 2-3 months down the road. In addition, the processing time to get an Application Hearing date once you finally get your application filed, is 8-9 months and expected to increase to over one year shortly.

If a tenant’s behavior is so bad that if they were on the street, they would be arrested, the police can do nothing if they are on the landlord’s property. The police have been stripped of all authority to do law enforcement and property protection if the offender is a tenant. Thus, individuals have not only lost the enjoyment of their properties but lost the right to defend themselves by calling police for assistance.

The police would immediately remove the tenant who behaved like this from a shop or building, but if the tenant is on the private property, the landlord is left helpless.

Vacancy Tax

As you will learn shortly, the Vacant Unit Tax works in tandem with the amendments to the Residential Tenancy Act that now make it impossible to evict a tenant who does not pay their rent and/or who does damage to the unit.

The UN has a clever scheme for finding out how many and who lives in a private residence, and this scheme also dictates to a property owner that any dwelling unit in their private residence that is left unoccupied for more than 6 months is subject to a hefty tax.

Taxation used to be about generating enough revenue to manage the municipality, but no more. Now it is used as a ‘punishment’ and coercion to force property owners to rent out units they prefer not to rent out.

The housing crisis was a deliberate crisis imposed by the UN so that it can later impose Vacancy Taxes, both to swindle property owners out of the exclusive use of the property they paid for, but also to end all privacy rights. The pretext is that this tax is to force people to rent their unoccupied space whether they wish to or not, to increase the availability of rental units.

The Vacancy Tax scheme was planned LONG BEFORE the housing crisis caused by the Liberal government and the UN Planner army. See here the 43^rd version of the Municipal Act, 2001 (Ontario) (archived here) effective May 17^th, 2017, and note that for the first time (see Table of Contents), Part lX.1 Optional Tax on Vacant Residential Units is listed.

If you check the 42^nd version of this Act (archived here), which was effective May 16th, 2017, you will see there was no Vacancy Tax option for municipalities.

AS WE SAID, the UN and the traitors in federal, provincial and municipal governments, all controlled by the UN since 1985 had this tax planned many years ago because the housing crisis was also very much planned long ago.

In November 2022, Ontario municipalities gave property owners notice they were FORCING property owners to rent their rental units under the penalty of having a ‘vacancy tax’ charged to their property if the property owner fails to disclose to the municipality what units they have and whether they are occupied, with a deadline to provide such private information being by March 2023. See the example of the City of Ottawa threat of a vacancy tax, here.

This has already been implemented in the City of Ottawa and what is worse, is that you have the responsibility to tell the City if your property is vacant or not and if you fail to tell the City, you are automatically charged the additional 1%, which on average, adds about $2,00-4,500 to an annual property tax bill.

Some Ottawa property owners could pay $250 or more just for failing to check a box on the City’s website. The Vacant Unit tax being introduced on 2023 property bills comes with this mandatory step. See the CBC News report of March 1, 2022 here (archived here).

Here (archived here) is the Toronto version of the ‘Vacancy Tax’ swindle and transfer of control of owner’s use of their private property to the municipality.

One year later, in 2023 most municipalities were using ‘vacancy taxation’ as a means of punishment and for control over private property in their jurisdictions. The property owner no longer gets to decide if they want to rent an apartment in their home or rent out their home when on extended stays out of the country. If they do not rent these vacant units and homes, they will be taxed for not renting.

This means that if you want to live in Arizona for 8 months of the year as you have a right to do, or if you have to go out of town to work as do so many oil patch workers, and you don’t want strangers living in your house, your property taxes will increase.

The reason that there is a housing crisis in the first place is two-fold:

run away migration to Canada due to open borders and fraudulent Immigration policies caused by Canada’s signing onto the UN’s Migration Pact and open borders policies, and
because the UN-controlled Landlord and Tenancy Board of Ontario (LTB Ontario) has thoroughly taken constructive possession of a property where even a solid and otherwise binding contract between the landlord and tenant has become voidable.

In June 2022, the Tribunals Ontario website (archived here) that oversaw the administration of ALL Ontario Tribunals, stated:

“As part of our modernization initiatives, most applications and documents can be submitted electronically, by mail or courier.
Our in-person service counters will remain closed until further notice. Submitting applications and documents electronically is easy, fast and convenient.”

Not only does the electronic system not work properly or at all, but this ‘initiative’ is to force us to adapt to the Artificial Intelligence systems imposed by the UN’s world government. It is the digital ID system already implemented.

The LTB Ontario fax number has not been in service since January 2021. All emails get a response that they are very busy and they might not answer one’s enquiry for a few months.

That is what is called the Public-Private Partnership (PPP or P3) --government no longer provides live service at cost, but government keeps collecting taxes as though they do. They move services, after creating brand-new private corporations with public money, to these new entities that reduce services to the point of offering none. They are not subject to Freedom of Information requests either. See our PUBLIC-PRIVATE PARTNERSHIP FRAUD series starting here for details about these asset transfers.

‘Due process’ is now fake courts called administrative tribunals.

Ontario Municipal Board (OMB) - Local Planning Appeal Tribunal (LPAT)

Another hazard for private property owners is the Ontario Municipal Board (OMB), now the Local Planning Appeal Tribunal (LPAT), a tribunal of political appointees that decide property use matters.

They often have conflicts of interests from having been elected officials or bureaucrats previously employed by the very municipalities standing before them as a party and are often so incompetent they routinely ignore legal non-conforming rights and other property rights.

But as with all tribunals, it is a great revenue generator for lawyers who now feather their nests using UN-imposed provincial legislation. As with every piece of legislation, a massive bureaucracy is birth to ensure a UN army of bureaucrats of sufficient size to totally overwhelm unsuspecting property owners.

For many years, the OMB (now LPAT) served as an independent tribunal that had conducted hearings and made decisions on appeals arising under the Planning Act. The Planning Act of course, is weaponized by the UN’s Municipal Planners that have devastated property owners everywhere with their opinions on land use.

In December of 2017, the Ontario government passed the Building Better Communities and Conserving Watersheds Act, 2017. The legislation makes fundamental changes to the planning and development system in Ontario (archived here) to ensure it is in accordance with the UN’s goals to end private property ownership. The new legislation is intended to:

reduce the number and types of matters which can be appealed, making it a dictatorship;

limit the grounds of appeal that can be advanced before the LPAT, making it the final word on any issue, even though the likelihood of corruption, collusion and plain fraud is evident;
eliminate the introduction of new information (no more de novo hearings) so that if hidden documents are finally uncovered, they cannot be considered – all to ensure that municipalities continue to thwart the purpose and intent of the Freedom of Information legislation, and
limit who can participate in LPATs, to ensure the small property owner is buried by planners.

The LPATs are even worse because the appointees are UN Sustainable Development allies and every opinion of the UN planner will be upheld.

The LPAT/Municipal Planner ensures there is no way out of the theft of their properties by the UN-controlled municipalities.

The LPAT does not hear verbal expert evidence or provide for cross-examination. Expert planning evidence will be presented for consideration through written witness statement prepared by professional planners and other technical experts. It will all be accepted as based on law.

In the case of appeals involving Official Plans or Zoning By-laws, the LPAT can overturn a matter if the tribunal determines that the municipal decision is inconsistent with provincial policies and municipal plans, both of which are dictated by the United Nations (UN). No one gets to contradict the UN.

Municipal Planning only became a ‘career’ when the UN took over municipalities in 1992.

There is not a single thing about planning for land use that is based in science or law that is not conjured up as required to tighten the screws on the private landowner. The planners rarely know anything about legal non-conforming property rights and if they do, they ensure those rights are buried deep in their babble. It amounts to fraud by omission.

The goal of the municipal planners is to end private property ownership for their master, the UN; the goal of the LPAT is to support the planner army in their achievement of the UN’s goal. Property owners will never see the inside of a real court room where settled law on legal non-conforming rights can be relied upon.

Minor Variance Committees

Corruption and fraud in ‘minor variance’ practices by researcher and affected property owner, Denis Rancourt is explored in his article, here (archived here).

As Rancourt shows, developers can get minor variances to completely destroy the enjoyment of property for neighbours and he provides a photo of what the City of Ottawa planners and minor variance committee did to a senior on his street when they provided minor variances and rezoning to the developers building on either side of the Senior’s property.

The Senior’s property is the little white house sandwiched between two new residential buildings. As Rancourt points out, they block out the sun, and all she hears all summer are the many air conditioners.

The developer who bought the two lots next to Rancourt’s neighbour’s property made applications to sever the lots into three, followed by so-called “minor variance” applications to build a large two-unit three-story building and a large single-unit home.

This would have had deleterious effects on his neighbour’s enjoyment of her property. And this rezoning under the pretext of ‘minor variance’ was the beginning of his crash course in the corrupt practice of “minor variances” in Ontario.

As he explains, the minor variance provision (s. 45(1)) of the Planning Act is unconstitutional, and both the Committee and the Board most often do not have jurisdiction to approve variances.

“Ontario is the only province in Canada whose bylaw-variance provision in its planning act sets a jurisdictional threshold as “minor variance”, without defining “minor” and without providing the established criteria of undue harm from compliance with the bylaw and absence of injury to neighbouring properties.”

The unelected Committee would not hear or receive any challenge to its jurisdiction to decide the minor variance applications!

Rancourt won against the developer when the developer backed out. However, as Rancourt mentions, the minor variance provision of the Planning Act continues to be misused. It is unlawfully a planning instrument that gives the tribunals virtually unlimited discretion – this is the case with all UN-Administrative Law Tribunals in Ontario.

There are many, many more unaccountable, tyrannical and corrupt UN-Tribunals at work destroying life in Canada, and particularly Ontario. The above were only a small sampling –others listed on the Tribunals Ontario website include the Animal Care Review Board, Assessment Review Board, Child And Family Services Review Board, Custody Review Board, Fire Safety Commission, Human Rights Tribunal Of Ontario, Landlord And Tenant Board, Licence Appeal Tribunal, Ontario Civilian Police Commission, Ontario Parole Board, Ontario Special Education Tribunal, and Social Benefits Tribunal.

All individuals faced with dealing with these tribunals have been deprived of the true court system -- these boards are usually manned by lawyers and/or political friends. Some say it is like being water-boarded by Boards whose job it is to gaslight and drown them in fake laws, abuses of authority and paper.

When you hear the term Committee, Board, Commission, Committee or Tribunal, you know you are in the grip of the UN.

Massive mess trying to register property held in a Trust!

You know the public is in trouble when even seasoned lawyers can’t register property in the Land Titles system.

In an article titled ‘Real Estate Meets Trust Law: Land Registration Ontario Style’ (archived here) the legal firm Blaney McMurtry LLP explains the mess that one faces when trying to register property held in a trust in Ontario.

“What a tangled web it currently is when Ontario real estate lawyers attempt to register transactions involving real property held in trust.[1] The electronic registration system (“e-reg”) in Ontario has seemingly relevant and valid boxes to tick to reflect the true nature of what is intended to transpire. However, the present Director of Titles’ perspective regarding trusts is at odds with the system and practice standards that have developed since the implementation of the e-reg system, not to mention the law.

It is uncontroversial to state that interests in real property can be held personally and in trust under Ontario law. Where a trust is involved, the trustee or trustees hold legal title to the property that is the object of the trust, with the beneficiaries having a beneficial interest. This is all fine and well as an intellectual exercise, but title needs to be accurately reflected in the government’s land registration records. Further complicating matters is the fact that Ontario has two systems: registry and land titles, with the former being phased out due to the move to electronic registration.”

Remember that TERANET acquired Ontario’s land management system for free, had legislation written to benefit it against the interests of the public and 30 years later is still a mess. Is this deliberate, as was every other ‘mess’ they engaged in to cover up what was really going on? Of course, because the lawyers that set it up knew that ‘registering’ real estate documents instead of officially inspecting and recording instruments protected TERANET from police investigation and prosecution.

In law, HE WHO CREATES, OWNS.

TERANET created a legal entity and made it the official ‘owner’ of the property, simply by distorting and replacing your given name.

Also, please let us know if any of our hyperlinks have stopped working so that we can fix them. Thank you.

People-United
people-united.ca

Subscribe now

Tip via Kofi/Stripe

E-transfer tips within Canada:
ADMIN-PU@proton.me